Hacker News Reader

Comment by NotSuspicious | Hacker News Reader

I wonder how this may have impacted world history. Something along the lines of humans have grain storage >> rats are attracted to grain >> cats are attracted to rats >> humans are attracted to cats >> human populations with cats become slightly more schizoaffective (which in most premodern societies is not really pathological) >> these societies commune with the divine more/tell the future/develop more complex religious institutions >> these religious institutions help stabilize society

Kinda seems like a win-win to be honest.

View on HN

From an evolutionary point of view I still think cats are the most successful animals. They have managed to get the ultimate apex predator (humans) to feed, care and provide shelter for them, in exchange for merely existing and looking cute.

How is this different from dogs?

Cats were useful, so were dogs.

Now they're both mostly just for being cute.

Dogs are generally better companions, but lots of people have dog-like cats that wanna be around them 24-7.

> Dogs are generally better companions, but lots of people have dog-like cats that wanna be around them 24-7.

I guess it depends on how you define "better". We have cats who snuggle with us in bed at night, but mostly do their own thing during the day, aside from little spurts here and there where they'd like (but don't demand) some attention.

Meanwhile, most of my friends' dogs annoy the hell out of me. No, I don't want you to jump on me and slobber all over my face every time I see you. And most of my dog-parent friends agree that their dog requires a lot more attention and work than our cats do.

To each their own, I suppose.

In reality cats are man's best friend. Dogs are a child surrogate, except they never reach an age where they're independent. Which is probably half the appeal: they never outgrow us, unlike our children (or our cats).

Any kind of companionship, even a mouse, can provide that kind of emotional support, but that says nothing of the animal's intent or ability to harm others. They are solitary creatures whereas dogs are social creatures. It's little wonder they would be carriers for parasites such as Toxoplasma gondii, whereas dogs aren't

If you ever watch the videos of the cats going outside with a camera, they almost always end up meeting up with other random neighborhood cats and interact and play. I don't think they're as solitary as people think.

We have a number in the house and they enjoy each other's company.

> They are solitary creatures

They're not. Feral cats form colonies with complex social structures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_cat#Colonies

House cats are much more solitary creatures that are very jealous of their human slaves' relationships.

Just to expand upon what civilitty said: cats are solitary hunters, but live in social packs. They absolutely prefer to live socially if given the choice. Cats being solitary creatures is a myth.

Your rebuttal is also wrong, since cats do make decisions for the good of their colony.

Great point. I guess the 21st century will close out with at least an AI powered cat-dog, possibly a synthetic biological mutant cat-dog, possibly even a cyborg pet cat-dog with a brain internet interface for friend-foe identification, poisonous food identification, "I lost my pet", etc. Probably on a cloud license (you never really own your pet... all pets are the property of CloudCorp...)

Cats are not socially dependent animals. They are sole survivors. It makes perfect sense to me that cats would, like rodents, be common carriers of such diseases.

Feral house cats form colonies and are relatively social, although they typically hunt alone.

Rodents are extremely social, like people levels of social.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here.

I feel like we domesticated dogs and selectively bred them to follow commands and do what we want. For cats it's more like the other way around, they domesticated us and still have their complete independence.

I honestly feel that the majority of the 'cats are anti-social' is due to them being in chaotic households. we've rescued a number of cats over the decades and no matter how antisocial the family claims they were before they got rid of them, after a year or so they are just cuttle bugs in our house, which is quiet and very consistent schedule wise.

To me cats are a lot like introvert-leaning ambivert people. They enjoy being social, but context and consent are important, and energy for socialization is not boundless.

Plus cat pictures have evolved all over the internet and will affect vision systems in AI. Immortalizing the cat in the post - biological world

Cats also provide companionship and emotional support, and those are invaluable for humans.

Also, I wonder if it is really evolutionary if most of their current traits (physical and otherwise) were selected by humans.

Now excuse me, I must withdraw to tend to my feline masters.

Cats are very much social creatures. They can share activities (or, more often, lack thereof) with others. But they're not pack creatures like dogs.

> these religious institutions help stabilize society

I'm not sure this is true, there are plenty of conflicts because of religion. I would argue the most stable would for nobody to be religious

Look up lead plumbing in the Roman Empire and the documented case of many emperors and council members being more "aggressive" than usual.

Lead plumbing pales in comparison to the lead they consumed via cooking pans (typically a lead / copper alloy) and a lot of Roman utensils used lead. Most tap water at room temperature won't absorb lead from pipes due to the mineral content and acidity. However, cooking in a pot made from lead will definitely poison you.

>which in most premodern societies is not really pathological

Why? Crazy people have more often than not been severely repressed in former societies.

Somebody read Snow Crash.... ?

This Snow Crash thing, is it a virus, a drug or a religion?

What’s the difference?

Yes

This:

https://wiki.c2.com/?NamShubOfEnki

The ideas in Snow Crash probably come in part from the bicameral mind theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_Consciousness_in...

There's essentially no evidence for this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com