HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

Interesting video here of one of the San people running down a Kudu which collapses from exhaustion after an 8 hour chase: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o. Hard to compare this to Sorokin because the hunter is running in veld, not on a road, and has far less access to refueling points. Also, if he fails to track the prey down on day one, he would probably have a go again on day two, maybe even day three. Interesting claims too, that as an upright runner which sweats from glands all over his body, and as a creature capable of carrying water, man may have had persistence advantages over creatures with less ability to cool themselves and which run on four legs - a less energy efficient mode of running according to Attenborough.

⬐ igouy

"Over the course of 20 years, only two of the ER hunts observed by Liebenberg were spontaneous. Eight others were prompted by Liebenberg so that they could be filmed for television documentaries."

p436 "The endurance running hypothesis and hunting and scavenging in savanna-woodlands"

https://www.originalwisdom.com/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-ma...

⬐ igouy

Dog owners know to take water with them for the dog, if they're walking a few miles on a hot day.

⬐ igouy

That gives the wrong impression. That's about people trying to keep their pets comfortable, not about how well dogs can run in the heat.

⬐ igouy

You might find this interesting —

"Rather than being the elite heat-endurance athletes of the animal kingdom, humans are instead using their elite intellect to leverage everything they can from their moderate endurance capabilities, optimising their behaviours during a hunt to bridge the gap between their limited athleticism and that of their more physically capable prey. Our capacity for profuse sweating provides a subtle but essential boost to our endurance capabilities in hot environments. This is a slight but critical advantage that our ingenuity magnifies to achieve the seemingly impossible: the running down of a fleeter-footed quarry."

2020 "Are humans evolved specialists for running in the heat? Man vs. horse races provide empirical insights"

https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1113/EP088502

> We really are not optimal in any particular way.

Human running sounds pretty close to optimal to me, only not on the usually expected dimension: https://youtu.be/826HMLoiE_o

This is the one that I remember watching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o. Not exactly 24 hours though.

⬐ pkphilip

Then we have Cliff Young who ran 875 km in 5 days - at the age of 61.

https://www.farmprogress.com/blog/cliff-young-farmer-who-out...

⬐ Lhiw

Humans can effectively run forever if it weren't for needing sleep, or eventually, needing to replace fat stores.

> Previous estimates, when accounting for glycogen depletion, suggest that a human could run at about a 10 minute per mile pace, which allows existing fat stores to be converted to glycogen, forever. The only limit to our eventual mileage, therefore, is our need for sleep. https://nikomccarty.medium.com/how-far-can-humans-run-d5c97f...

⬐ js2

There are regularly 24 hour races and I've done a few myself. 100 miles in 24 hours isn't that hard. The record was just recently set at 192.25 miles (309.4 km):

https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a37465691/sania-sorokin-24...

There are also 48 hr and 7 day races. Sleep is necessary somewhere between those two points, though two guys just went 85 hours with basically no sleep:

https://www.bigsbackyardultra.com/

That's a race where every hour on the hour you have to complete 4.166 miles. You get as much rest as the balance of your time after you complete a lap till the next hour begins. Most competitors complete a lap in around 48-52 minutes. The race continues until there is only one runner left to complete a lap.

I remember watching this David Attenborough program where he was talking about the hunting techniques of some bushmen in Africa. They did a close-up shot of their feet while out on a hunt and they were wearing regular track shoes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o&t=3m05s

I think they might have been Adidas

Attenborough https://youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o The relentless zombies are us.

We're physically adapted: sweat pores, bipedal, achilles tendon. Perhaps neccessary, but high calorie ROI seems insufficient for the evolution of intelligence.

⬐ AnotherGoodName

I believe persistent hunting also encourages very high intelligence for the tracking aspect as well. You're essentially emulating another creatures brain in order to figure out their likely movements whenever they go out of sight.

⬐ hyperpallium

Not sure how important this is, often not needed if there are tracks etc. It would help, but wouldn't a better sense of smell help more?

⬐ AnotherGoodName

If you watch the attenborough documentary linked above it has some clear examples. "The hunters have no tracks at this point and so must imagine the path the Kudu has taken". And later, "The tracks have disappeared again. He imagines being in the mind of the Kudu to deduce the direction it must have fled".

There's also the case that tracks alone need a lot of intelligence to process. "Here they can see the Kudu were running by the spacing of the tracks and the bull is isolated and taking a different track".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

⬐ hyperpallium

I posted that link. My comment was about relative importance.

⬐ SuoDuanDao

That's a great point. I once saw one of those "HFY" threads where someone was speculating that if we became a warrior species in a multiplanetary federation, we'd be feared not just for our tenacity but also our ability to play mind games. Basically, "Never play poker against a human".

⬐ ed_balls

That saliva bit... I just thought about another virus outbreak.

Another persistence hunter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNbqvqf3-14

⬐ ganzuul

It annoys me to no end when fiction portrays humans as a weak, defenseless species without our tools. We're nothing of the sort. We can climb on negative inclines, run an ultra-marathon, lift several times our own weight, deep-dive, heal massive wounds, our immune system is without par, and we perform all kinds of feats of dexterity. It is simply modern humans who have no need for the adaption our ancestors have gifted us with.

⬐ pbhjpbhj

>our immune system is without par //

Is it just lack of use that means we get sick from tainted meat, and such, when other mammals seem to stay healthy?

⬐ d883kd8

First, you or I probably could eat raw meat from a freshly killed wild herbivore with very little risk, compared to raw meat from a modern cow, raised in crowded conditions, handled by dozens of other humans, and pushed through various surfaces.

Also, there's a theory that fire and cooking is part of what allowed hominids to develop their superior brains and leave the trees behind for a fully savannah-based lifestyle.

⬐ hyperpallium

BTW Steak tartare is a dish of raw meat: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Steak_tartare

There's also sushi and sashimi.

⬐ ganzuul

I'm not sure about that one.

As a species we need to stay in groups and take care of our sick. We traveled vast distances by foot and sought out our own kind.

To equivocate, I did hear about ancient ruins of villages in China where unknown strains of plague were unearthed, before this COVID-19 stuff. I assume these then became cursed villages that no one visited.

⬐ quaquaqua1

Are the same pieces of meat involved?

Lots of grocery store meat that you buy "fresh" was killed x number of days ago.

If a dog eats raw meat within a few hours of it being killed, it's a big difference.

How did I come to this opinion? Try freezing a super market steak a few days before the "expiration date." Then unfreeze it a few days after the expiration date.

You'll notice a rancid smell immediately upon cooking.

⬐ war1025

> Lots of grocery store meat that you buy "fresh" was killed x number of days ago.

Most beef, at least that you buy locally from a butcher who got the animal from a local farmer, is dry aged in a cooler for 10 - 14 days after slaughter. [1]

I don't know whether that's true for mass-market meat or not. But it's very common to let meat age before eating it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beef_aging

⬐ caymanjim

If you visit a developing country, you'll still see people bathing and washing clothes and cookware in rivers. You'll also see outhouses on stilts along the same river. While there's a high incidence of illness among people who live like this, many people clearly tolerate it well. If I were to do that now, I'd get sick, but eventually I'd probably be able to tolerate it as well (assuming I survived).

It's a common misconception that animals don't get sick from tainted meat or water. They do, and when they're weakened enough, they get eaten. Clearly some have a higher tolerance of certain pathogens (e.g. vultures), but many succumb to intestinal bacteria and parasites at alarming rates. We just don't see it.

⬐ ijidak

Interesting. What do you mean that our immune system is without par?

Do we have a better immune system than other primates and other animal groups?

⬐ ganzuul

So I have gathered but I don't have sources saying the same. Animal models (read: tests on other mammals) for studying our immune system are rather inaccurate, and auto-immune diseases are very dangerous to humans.

Perhaps other social predators actually are on the same level as us.

⬐ throwaway_pdp09

Well, let's see...

> We can climb on negative inclines,

Can you?

> run an ultra-marathon,

Have you ever?

> lift several times our own weight,

Can you?

> deep-dive,

Have you ever?

> heal massive wounds,

Unless we die from them, yup.

> our immune system is without par,

Meaningless claim.

> and we perform all kinds of feats of dexterity

And birds can can't, but they can fly. Elephant's can't but they've got long noses. etc. So?

Human exceptionalism (from a human, I assume)

⬐ lostlogin

Add in the fact that humans can work together and then not all those roles need filling by each individual.

⬐ Accujack

> It is simply modern humans who have no need for the adaption our ancestors have gifted us with.

I agreed up until this. Of course, I disagreed with my evolutionary biology profs in college, too, on this subject.

These adaptations and others are still operating and still changing. They're not a point in time change to us, they're a bell curve of adaptation over time. We're adapting in some measure right now to things like modern technology, although technology may continue to be a moving target long enough that we'll never finish adapting before it changes again.

Modern humans are just animals in a rectilinear jungle, still evolving, adapting, and changing.

⬐ ganzuul

Excuse me, I should have said "many contemporary humans", not "modern". There is a vast difference in time scale between the two and I did think of people who don't get enough exercise, work in an office, and watch TV the rest of the day.

Reminds me of endurance hunting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

⬐ foxyv

I've always wondered how meat from endurance hunting tastes. I imagine it's pretty gamey considering what stress does to deer and rabbit meat.

persistence hunt https://youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

⬐ NeedMoreTea

Never been especially convinced by the endurance hunting theory, as dogs are far better at it than we are, with much greater endurance. So why no bipedal Fido?

⬐ AstralStorm

Because the dog or cat would need vast incremental changes to body plan, while a tree ape does not need too much.

This video of a San hunter chasing down a Kudu is pretty good:

https://youtu.be/826HMLoiE_o

⬐ grecy

I was lucky enough to spend time with the San people, and it was one of the most moving experiences of my life.

http://theroadchoseme.com/the-juhoansi-living-san-museum

There was a good BBC doc that featured this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

One of the more reasonable theories about why Neanderthals went extinct was due to Homo Erectus and then Homo Sapiens having much more plentiful and common access to protein. The book Born to Run mentions Endurance Hunting[1] where tribes literally run down game animals such as elk or gazelles until they overheat as proof of this. There are tribes that . Virtually no other mammal on the planet can sweat while on the move. Big dogs and cats have to stop and pant or find shade to sweat and cool down. If they don't, they'll overheat and die. There are evil still tribes[2] that do this today.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

Persistence hunt in the Kalahari.

⬐ strig

That's a very different workload than pulling a heavy weight for long distances though.

⬐ bluGill

It is important to point out that heavy is relative. Heavy to a human is light to a bullock.

Have you heard of persistence hunting? Here's is a short documentary from the BBC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

It is believed to be one of the oldest hunting techniques, and so would indicate that humans are in fact meant to run long distances. According to Wikepedia, the runner runs for "about two to five hours over 25 to 35 km (16 to 22 mi)".

⬐ macspoofing

The fact that the rest of humanity didn't bother with persistence hunting may also be a clue that we weren't designed for that either.

⬐ adrianN

Or it's a clue that we figured out that building a trap or using a weapon to kill an animal from greater distance burns a lot less calories.

⬐ macspoofing

For sure. And that's the point. Persistence hunting is a strategy developed by a set of humans living in one small area of the world that isn't particularly hospitable to humans. In fact, give how inhospitable the African Savannah is, it is a point against the idea that this is somehow a 'natural' state of being for us. And it makes sense, this kind of long distance running is incredibly energy intensive and injury prone - it's not a great way to make a living.

⬐ bluetech

It is not as clear cut as you say, there appears to be some scientific discussion on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endurance_running_hypothesis

Why?

Humans evolved on the plains of Africa, hunting animals by running them down to exhaustion[1].

I think some of the bare foot running purists become cult-like in their views, but I think Chris Mcdougall's "Born to Run"[2] book is worth reading and thinking about. It's an easy, well written and entertaining read too.

[1] Watch the amazing Attenborough clip of them running an healthy, fully grown male antelope down. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

[2] http://www.chrismcdougall.com/born-to-run/the-barefoot-runni...

⬐ evandijk70

Even though I am not convinced running is necessarily bad for joints, and I am a runner myself, the argument that humans are evolved to run seems to fall flat for me.

For one, AFAIK humans rarely aged beyond 40 in those times, so it is entirely feasible that the accumulated wear and tear starts to hurt the joints after that age.

⬐ baddox

As far as I can tell, the endurance running hypothesis is not considered a settled matter, but even if it is true, it doesn’t mean that subsequent adaptations in all or some groups of humans hasn’t compromised this ability. Moreover, perhaps the environment when humans evolved on the plains of Africa didn’t provide much selective pressure for joints to last as many years as modern humans expect their joints to last.

⬐ nl

Yes I agree it's not settled.

But nor is it settled that running causes damage, and I think the endurance running hypothesis provides an interesting reason to consider the counter-case.

There's the loci method for memorization:

The method of loci (loci being Latin for "places") is a method of memory enhancement which uses visualizations with the use of spatial memory, familiar information about one's environment, to quickly and efficiently recall information. The method of loci is also known as the memory journey, memory palace, or mind palace technique. Many memory contest champions claim to use this technique to recall faces, digits, and lists of words. These champions' successes have little to do with brain structure or intelligence, but more to do with using spatial memory and the use of the method of loci.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_loci

Correlations have been found between memory and the playing of 3D video games, which also utilize our spatial memory. (Though wandering around in a video game is probably a subpar surrogate for doing the same thing in meatspace.)

https://news.uci.edu/faculty/playing-3-d-video-games-can-boo...

I also recommend this BBC video of a persistence hunter tracking and running down a Kudu, just as an illustration of how walking/running, language/tracking, spatial memory, and planning/creativity are all tied together as a system that was once necessary for our survival:

https://youtu.be/826HMLoiE_o

⬐ viridian

Funny you mention this, I swear when I replay a video game with my girlfriend that I played solo before, while listening to a podcast or something, I can recall with amazing clarity stuff I had heard on the podcast at a particular point in the game. It's not a minor effect at all, it's pretty huge.

⬐ archagon

Huh, I guess that explains why I recall specific passages in audiobooks when I revisit the places I walked while listening to them.

Kinda problematic if I listen to an unnerving passage in a place I enjoy visiting!

⬐ thefalcon

Absolutely! I have paths in my old neighborhood where if I walk them I can recall specific passages from Ready Player One or Steven King's On Writing. If you need to clear a specific associative memory from a place you enjoy visiting, just keep visiting while listening to other audiobooks and you may lose that specific association.

⬐ z3t4

am i the only one that can remember where in the code something is located ? By remembering the shape of the code.

⬐ r00fus

Probably why whitespace approach (tab =? Spaces) is so important to coders.

⬐ yawz

I can definitely relate to that.

⬐ thefalcon

Yeah, the document preview pane in Sublime Text is like a live satellite map of my code that gives me the ability to warp wherever I want.

⬐ gulperxcx

Same here with the minimap in Atom

⬐ Sunset

An interesting example is: playing World of Warcraft and watching/listening to a youtube video at the same time on another monitor.

After months I've been able to recall exact details about the random video I watched by returning to the same place inside the gameworld.

Either that -- or our perception of morality is wrong.

Maybe it's okay to eat animals as long as we treat them well. After all if they live a long happy and decently full life that's what really counts right?

I think this video really gives a good idea of how humanity used to think of hunting and eating animals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

We've really lost touch with our empathy for other creatures

In the old days people would respect the animal, hug it after killing it... on some level I think animals understand that their own death is a part of life.

⬐ wewiereiuyui

If someone lets you live a happy life then hunts you down and kills you to eat, is that OK with you ? If it's ok for you to rule on the life of a pig, say, then why isn't it ok for another human to decide on your life ?

(I really don't agree with this position - just playing devil's advocate)

⬐ mehwoot

If someone lets you live a happy life then hunts you down and kills you to eat, is that OK with you

Yes, definitely. If the alternative was that I didn't exist at all- most pigs wouldn't be around if we didn't eat them (https://xkcd.com/1338/).

The way I ethically decide whether it's ok to eat meat is whether, if that animal could express a choice, it would likely choose to exist and then be eaten or not exist at all. If an animal is kept in so much pain that it would rather not exist, then I think that's unethical. But if it would still choose to exist, then it's better than nothing- don't forget that living in the wild is generally a pretty harsh life as well.

⬐ pingec

Sorry but I completely disagree with this view.

It's not about what options they have. They are already here and they do not want to not exist nor be treated badly, they want to live a happy life. It's us who deny them this because we prioritize our convenience over their life and suffering.

If you applied the same thinking to slavery many people would be outraged.

⬐ mehwoot

They are already here and they do not want to not exist nor be treated badly

They are only here because we eat them. Look at the link I gave- nearly every mammal (counted by total weight) that is alive on earth is so because it has some use to us (https://xkcd.com/1338/). If we stopped eating them, the vast, vast majority of them wouldn't be alive. Economics demands it. Nobody is going to use land to raise herds of cattle and just let them exist. So you have to make a choice between either the animal not existing, or us eating it.

If you applied the same thinking to slavery many people would be outraged.

But in that case, the people who were slaves could have paid their own way and been useful to society outside of being slaves. Cattle can't do anything else useful. Either we eat them or they're not around. We can be kinder to them, but we can't (within any reasonable interpretation of the modern capitalist society we find ourselves in) just not eat them and have the same number around. They have no other function.

⬐ tillom

I get what your saying. I think you've set a really low bar for how you decided wether something is good or bad though.

For me something doesn't become ethical when an animal can just about tolerate bad conditions.

I cant give you a hard line for where I decide, but it's not that.

What about if an animal can have some positive experiences of a wild animal (some space) with fewer of the negatives (very painful death). We have given them a better alternative arguably.

⬐ stanfordkid

There really isn't a "good" or "bad" ... there is only "nature" ... and it's a beautiful hierarchical food-chain that should be appreciated and understood by all elements within it. Humans are one of the few that have the capacity to fully understand it. Sadly they still do not recognize the inherently hierarchical nature of even human society and this leads both the people at the bottom and top to hate each other.

Humans are the only creatures that have somehow attached themselves to this strange idea that controlling their pleasure and pain response (rather than their freedom) is the most important thing in the world.

Society and civilization should exist but only to protected freedom-- that doesn't mean that everyone should or can be happy. But rather freedom to compete and continue the threads of nature is what is important. Nature above all else.

⬐ taneq

Being humanely slaughtered is close to the best way for any living creature to go out - far better than dying of horrible diseases, infections, being mauled to death and partly eaten alive by a predator, slowly starving or dying of thirst.

Our perception of morality is shaped purely to benefit us as cooperative social K-selected mammals. It doesn't have any real significance beyond how it makes us feel.

I think that there's a common thread that underlies the development of intelligence in both humans and Portia spiders. We both evolved in an environment where we were at a sensory and physical disadvantage to our prey. We both relied more on understanding the behavior of our prey in order to hunt. In the case of early humans, we adopted a style of hunting known as persistence hunting.

Persistence hunting ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting )is a general hunting strategy in which a hunter chases their prey over a very long distance(15-30 miles). Eventually the prey becomes weak and succumbs to exhaustion. On its own, that's not very special -- both dogs and hyenas adopt a very similar hunting strategy. The key difference is that humans lack the extremely sensitive sensory abilities that are used by other persistence hunters.

In the absence of such senses, early hominids had to predict where prey would go and accurately pursue them over very long distances based on very small amounts of visual evidence. In short, early hominids hunted by simulating the minds of their prey. If you look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o (a documentary on persistence hunting), you can watch some Kudu tribesmen literally simulating where an antelope will go.

It certainly seems to me like lucking into an evolutionary niche where you get caloric benefits that are directly linked to how well you can simulate the fairly-complicated minds of your prey is pretty much a recipe for extreme selective pressure in favor of general intelligence. The story is a little different in the case of Portia, given that they are apparently at a visual advantage to their prey. However, I think the examples mentioned in the article make a strong case that Portia's comparative hunting advantage is in planning the best attack method based on the behavior of a given type of prey.

⬐ aristus

I think you got your signs reversed. The spider in question has extremely good vision.

"Jumping spiders already have excellent vision and Portia’s is ten times as good, making it sharper than most mammals."

⬐ pmelendez

I don't know if the parent post was edited but it does state right now:

"The story is a little different in the case of Portia, given that they are apparently at a visual advantage to their prey. "

"In this compelling clip, we see a tribesman runner pursue his prey through the most harsh conditions in a gruelling eight hour chase" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

I had to continue:

> Work before farming resembles what the rich do on holiday today.

The rich spend their holidays intimidating lions of their own kill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBpu4DAvwI8 or running for 8 hours to drive a Kudo to having a heart attack https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

>Subsistence farmers worked far longer hours than their ancestors. They died younger and lived more miserable lives. The sole upside was that farming allowed the same plot of land to feed many more people.

The author misses the upside of not worrying about getting eaten by a lion or trampled by a wildebeest.

⬐ noelwelsh

As far as I am aware, by every measure hunter-gatherers had better lives than the vast majority of farmers until very recently. They had better nutrition, as evidenced by being taller. They had more equal societies. They worked very little. Contemporary hunter-gatherers generally live only on very marginal land, as more organised societies have taken over the rest, and their lifestyle is not a good reflection of what life was like before civilisation.

A few links to explore: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_affluent_society

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_time#Hunter-gatherer

⬐ richmarr

If you believe Steven Pinker (and IIRC Jared Diamond) then hunter gatherers had a much higher chance of being brutally murdered. That'd probably be a down-side.

I have not come across the "without sleep" thing before and the Wikipedia link does not seem to mention it. The Wikipedia persistence hunting is to jog after them under the midday sun until the prey overheats. That stuff you can see on youtube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

Check this remarkable video on persistence hunting in the kalahari - a hunter literally chases a buck until it's completely exhausted. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

Whoever is interested, here are two very good academic articles about persistent hunting (subscription required):

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/508695

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248408...

Also, here is a video of a modern persistent hunter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

⬐ resatori

How do they bring the prey home after hunting it 30km?

⬐ sirrocco

Well.. from the article : "across his shoulders". I can't even imagine.

⬐ astral303

I watched the YouTube "Lost in Taiga" videos in Russian and they mention that the whole family traveled for two days (with overnight camping) over to eat the killed animal. Whether it was this 30km one or a different one is unclear.

⬐ bdunbar

On your back, in pieces.

⬐ pav3l

Endurance hunting is rarely a straight line race. Here is an example of a route for one of those hunts (it's from my first link): http://www.jstor.org/literatum/publisher/jstor/journals/cont...

As you can see, even though the overall distance is 25.1 km, the straight line distance between the start and finish is less than a mile.

⬐ ddunkin

It also reminded me of this, an old episode of This American Life: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/80/ru...

⬐ bubbleRefuge

Nice. I remember that myself.

⬐ smcl

I also recommend the book he wrote by the same title, featuring some of the same essays/articles featured in the broadcast and a good deal more. If you're in the US it should be no bother to find, but if you're abroad it'll take a bit of searching (or ordering from the US)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

This is a video of human hunters (Koi San, an African ethnic group that has been pushed to extinction over the last millennia by the Bantu tribes) chasing down a kudu antelope. Antelope are great runners, but they can't cool themselves as efficiently as humans. It's a beautiful video, and the way the hunter reacts after the kill is very moving.

⬐ columbo

That is a really cool video but I'm not sure if I'd take that to say "humans are better long distance runners".

The fact is that humans are the most intelligent species (excluding dolphins and mice) and have used that to their advantage. For example, carrying water and weapons. Since these tribesmen can carry water they can replenish water that the other animal cannot. If the tribemen and the antelope had the same amount of water (none) who would win?

Also, I'm not sure if it is the case in this video (also, my audio is not working so I'm at a loss for anything said during the video), it wasn't clear if they were using a triangle approach where you have two hunters on either side and one in the middle. In that instance the antelope might run back-and-forth over that long distance and not run in a straight line (meaning it ran farther, just not smarter).

Even if we disregard the benefits from a higher intelligence it still only says "humans are great long distance runners in hot/flat terrain when carrying water". For example, try out-jogging a deer this December in the midwestern wilderness, or slap on some tennis and try to wear out a husky when it is twenty-below and 30mph winds.

⬐ zizee

humans are the most intelligent species (excluding dolphins and mice)

When I read this for a split second I was thinking "man, how can this guy think dolphins are smarter than humans? And mice? What is he think... oohh, Heheh! Nice.

Even when the animal is running for his life, man wins. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

I love David Attenborough.

⬐ EliRivers

I do like the youtube crowd comments. As always, a vast number (referring to the fantastic work of the film crew) stating essentially "I don't know how to do this, therefore it's impossible and this is staged".

⬐ jmitcheson

You read YouTube comments? I don't know man, you might want to watch out. It could turn out in 20 years from now, researchers discover that it kills your brain cells or something.

⬐ EliRivers

Any time I find myself starting to trust humanity, it's a handy antidote.

⬐ mitchty

I agree about youtube comments. To make sure I never actually read them I installed the youtube herp derp extension on all my chrome/firefox browsers.

http://www.tannr.com/herp-derp-youtube-comments/

"In particular, persistence hunting (the form of hunting that relied on long distance running)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting

Here it is in action

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

"We’re the tortoises of the animal kingdom"

... That might be the deepest thing I've ever read.

Also, here's Attenborough narrating this article http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

⬐ phylofx

"We’re the tortoises of the animal kingdom" such a beautiful and witty analogy, isn't it?

⬐ bwldrbst

That's what separates us from the animals. Except for the weasel.

⬐ wowoc

Yeah, I'd say the tortoises are the tortoises of the animal kingdom.

> I am inclined to think we're built to go for a walk to a hunting ground, sprint and throw an arrow.

The adaption to bipedalism actually reduced our sprinting capabilities and increased our endurance. It's likely that we used our superior endurance to chase down our prey over long distances far before we had arrows. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

⬐ adrianwaj

If it were me, I would've told my buddies to start building a fence for next time while I was out hunting it down. Also dogs and horses could have helped with the hunt. How is he meant to carry the carcass back? Does he light a fire to signal to the others to help him? What happens if tigers smell the blood or no one reaches him in time, or a pack of hyenas are following the hunter? Most of the time, a lot of the hunt was reconnaissance (endurance yes, jogging no.) Large groups of people jogging frequently for long groups of time doesn't seem right, perhaps in parts of Africa (eg Kenya) jogging has become part of society and remains fun. Bipedalism has other benefits besides endurance: vision, climbing, reach, sitting, freeing up hands, inducing fear. People going on a 10km run every weekend, on concrete, in a polluted city, with a hunched back is just wrong. Just because you can jog, doesn't mean you must.

The San Bushmen in the Kalahari Desert still do this today. This BBC clip on persistence hunting (narrated by David Attenborough!) is worth a watch; their endurance is absolutely incredible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

If you are into hunting, I think you should make things fair for both sides. Leave the gun at home and try something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

⬐ lucasjung

Not sure why this is getting down-voted: I had assumed the comment to be tongue-in-cheek, and that video is absolutely fascinating. I'm completely in awe of those guys.

⬐ slackito

Why should we go for "fairness" when hunting for food? Using our brains isn't fair? Animals won't show any restraint when using their strengths to kill any weaker prey.

⬐ zatara

So, according to your definition of fairness, we should for example nuke Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia et al., as terrorists show no mercy with our women and children, so why should we bother? Or maybe Microsoft was just right to use its OS/Office monopoly to kill Netscape and many others, as they were in top of the food chain...

IMHO, fairness is necessary linked to bringing balance into the world. Using our brains is of course fair, but we should agree that there is much less brain work in the average modern hunter, drinking beer in a hideout and waiting for an opportunity to shoot a power rifle from a safe distance, than in any of the hunters depicted in the video. I of course cannot do what they do, but it was very humbling and moving to see such display of respect and fairness.

⬐ lucasjung

I think that you and parent both played the straw man against each other. This isn't a binary issue, it's a continuum. Modern hunters have a wide range of tools to choose from, at various points on the spectrum of "fairness." I would posit that "fairness" isn't even the primary factor in choice of equipment for most hunters in modern countries. Other considerations such as "challenge level" and laws/regulations probably have much more to do with it. For example, in the U.S. most areas have two deer seasons: a longer, earlier season where only bows and/or muzzle-loaders are allowed and a shorter, later season where modern high-power rifles are allowed.

This is, of course, anecdotal, but I don't know any hunters who use high-power rifles from blinds. Typically, deer stands are used by bow hunters. High-power rifles are typically used from much greater distances where the shots are correspondingly more difficult. I'm not really into deer hunting (I prefer upland fowl), so my experience with the subject is limited. Either way, the "brain power" part of it went into the development of the tools, not so much into their use. Also, only an idiot mixes alcohol with firearms (or broadheads). Yes, there are people out there stupid enough to do so, but they are a very small minority (it tends to be self-enforcing). Hunting from a deer stand typically involves getting up before dawn and climbing up onto a rickety platform to shiver silently for hours hoping that a deer comes by close enough to shoot. That's why I'm not a big fan of deer hunting.

Let's also not conflate "fair" with "humane." As I mentioned, the area where I currently live is so overpopulated with deer that professional hunters have to be hired to kill a few hundred each year (it's truly astounding how fast the local herds grow). If they don't kill enough, even more will die by starvation and disease. If they were overly concerned about fairness, they wouldn't be able to kill enough deer in time, and that would be inhumane.

⬐ zatara

You certainly show a level of maturity that is not common among typical hunters. I understand that you enjoy the process of hunting, not only the result, and I can sympathize with that. Thanks for augmenting my perspective on the subject.

⬐ lucasjung

On the one hand, I appreciate the second two sentences of your post. On the other hand, the first sentence wipes out any semblance of goodwill:

"You certainly show a level of maturity that is not common among typical hunters."

This is just plain stereotyping. I don't know how you formed your perception of the average maturity level of a typical hunter, but it clearly wasn't by actually interacting with typical hunters. Furthermore, I'm not even sure what a "typical" hunter is. That's kind of like a "typical" golfer, or a "typical" swimmer. I move around a lot, but I don't like to hunt alone, which unfortunately means I don't get to hunt very much any more. It also means that I'm always looking for new people to hunt with, and I've found hunters from all walks of life, often in very heterogeneous groups where the only thing they share in common is hunting.

If anything, hunting promotes maturity: when you teach a ten year old how to utilize a deadly weapon, and all of the ways you can accidentally hurt or kill yourself or others with it, and all of the rules for avoiding such mishaps, and all of the myriad ways you can get hurt or killed outdoors even without weapons involved, the sudden load of responsibilities tends to instill maturity in a way that less hazardous activities can't. True, some kids simply aren't ready for it as young as others, but most parents/mentors see this quickly and wait another year before resuming the lessons. Much like alcohol use in conjunction with firearms, it's rather self-enforcing: would you want to hang out in the middle of nowhere with an immature kid wielding a lethal weapon? Neither would I. Does it happen? Sure. Is it common? No.

⬐ zatara

I have no problems changing my mind when proved wrong, but there are facts that cannot be ignored. It is very difficult (and definitely not advisable) to stereotype individuals, but certain qualities can be easily attributed to groups of people. For example, I can say that the "typical swimmer" is not black, which shows no prejudice, just the statement of a fact. Likewise, I can also infer that the "typical" golfer is an upper-class/rich guy. Please bear in mind that I cannot say anything about a single individual, but there are certainly some common characteristics.

I apologize if I offended you in anyway, perhaps I have been just unlucky with my prior shallow and brief interactions with hunters.

I guess this is one of the best descriptions of my own "hunting" habits. It is amazing to me how hacking/making seems so similar to the kind of persistence hunting that our ancestors used to depend upon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o). As I meditate more about these traits and my own struggles with ADD/bipolar tendencies, it is becoming clearer that most hackers are indeed "hunters in a farmers' world".

⬐ arethuza

I wish I could give you more than one vote - that's one of the most insightful comments I've read on here.

(NB I've always been fascinated by prehistory and how our ancestors experiences shaped our own behaviour).

⬐ zatara

If you really like it, please have a look at http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/print/2009/12/hadza/finkel.... This has taught me more about hacking and life than most books I ever read. I believe pg was on the right track with the "Hackers & Painters" thing, but we are not only makers, we are actually the descendants of the original pre-historical hunters.

⬐ arethuza

Have you read this?

"After the Ice: A Global Human History 20,000-5000 BC"

http://www.amazon.com/After-Ice-Global-History-000-5000/dp/0...

⬐ zatara

Not yet, but it is definitely worthy a look. Thanks for the link.