Sociopathic competitive streak may doom society
Kudos for a cogent article on a vital subject: competition vs cooperation and the individual vs the group. Nature requires both. Without competition, evolution can’t operate. Without cooperation, it can’t produce interesting results(12 July, p 38).
As suggested, when we ask if human nature is selfish or altruistic, we are asking the wrong question. We are instinctive game players, equipped with a repertoire of strategies and behaviours. Those we deploy depend on circumstance, culture and individual experience. Genetic predisposition plays a role, but isn’t overwhelming. Where altruism is celebrated, we tend towards altruism. In places where sociopathic behaviour is tolerated or, worse, where the rewards it brings to individuals are taken as marks of status, we tend towards sociopathy. But societies that reach that point aren’t long for this world.
Falling birthrate could help us reverse inequality (1)
Apart from the environmental destruction of the planet, perhaps the greatest tragedy for humanity is extreme and rising inequality. So it is essential to ask whether it can be alleviated or reversed by the falling birthrate highlighted in the book you review, After the Spike. Fewer children should allow greater opportunities for the best possible education at every level, with smaller class sizes and less pressure on resources. The consequent reduced population of workers should result in higher wages and greater choice in employment. The problem in many countries of unaffordable (for many) housing due to overpopulation and inadequate supply would be alleviated and ultimately eliminated. Best that governments adjust to the inevitability of falling birthrate and its positives rather than attempting to prevent it(12 July, p 26).
Falling birthrate could help us reverse inequality (2)
The book lamenting humanity’s falling birthrate is off the mark. Instead of decrying this trend, economists should try to figure out how an economy can thrive without relying on unsustainable continual growth!
The revolution is just around the corner, again (1)
So “AI companies and tech analysts alike say the agentic AI revolution is just around the corner”(12 July, p 34). That would be in the same way as commercial nuclear fusion, fully autonomous all-road cars, personal flying vehicles, paperless offices and world peace, then?
The revolution is just around the corner, again (2)
The creators of AI agents that will run our lives for us need a posh motto. I suggest: “Living? Our servants will do that for us.” It is from the play 础虫毛濒 by French writer Auguste Villiers de l’Isle-Adam.
On contact lenses and the chopping of onions
Agatha Windig is probably on to something with her observation that contact lenses stop the tears while chopping onions, but not that it involves the iris and pupil. A rigid gas-permeable lens would probably filter out the volatiles that the onions release, keeping them from irritating the surface of the eye, the cornea, which would prevent tears. The iris and pupil wouldn’t be involved, as such 鈥� the iris is an internal structure and the pupil is an aperture in it(Letters, 12 July).
Orcas, please let us know the result of human tests
I see that orcas, by offering what appear to be gifts for us, are experimenting on us, presumably to determine our intelligence and whether we are worth teaming up with (or maybe domesticating). I’d love to know their conclusions(12 July, p 19).
Do weird fig trees have built-in fire retardant?
I was fascinated by the report of fig trees that produce calcium oxalate, but the question is how this benefits them. Samburu County, Kenya, where they are native, is prone to bush fires(12 July, p 15). Do we know if these fig species are more fire-resistant than other plants that don’t produce calcium oxalate?
Computer to test free will is impossible to build
Howie Firth posed a superb scenario related to the question of whether we have free will: “If every action we make is predetermined by the laws of physics, then it is possible to imagine constructing a computer that could predict what I will do at a particular moment”. He then suggests that, knowing its prediction, he could simply choose to do something else(Letters, 12 July).
Having written a book about this, the short answer is that you can’t build such a computer, even though the laws of physics are deterministic. There are three fundamental reasons: complexity (the sheer number of variables); chaos (sensitivity to initial conditions); and, most importantly, computational irreducibility 鈥� even simple rules can produce outputs that can’t be predicted without running the entire computation. It is precisely this lack of predictive ability that constitutes what I call “free will in practice”. This form of free will not only exists, but must exist, even in a deterministic universe.
Another example of public health gains
Devi Sridhar’s take on public health initiatives as key to longer, more enjoyable lives, rather than individual striving, brought to mind an important project in south London. Guy’s, King’s and St Thomas’ hospitals use any and all interactions with patients to look at their ““: key burdens of disease that, if addressed, can shrink “privilege gaps” in healthy life expectancy. Even just asking about these 鈥� use of tobacco and alcohol, weight, blood pressure and mental health 鈥� can have an impact, but getting a baseline enables tracking and improving metrics over time, with a positive impact on well-being and healthy life expectancy(5 July, p 38).
For the record
Carl-Friedrich Schleussner is at the International Institute for Applied System Analysis in Laxenburg, Austria (26 July, p 8)
Influenza viruses have an RNA genome (12 July, p 16).