Slashdot Mirror
On Yahoo!'s Acquisitions
Barry Norton writes "The Guardian has quite an insightful article about recent Yahoo acquisitions Delicious and Flickr. They quote Joshua Schachter, Delicious' creator: 'We're excited to be working with the Yahoo search team - they definitely get social systems and their potential to change the web. We're also excited to be joining our fraternal twin, Flickr!' And why Yahoo's interest? The article opines: 'It takes a lot of the hard work out of searching the web. The very clever thing about social software is that it puts the burden on to the user, not the provider.'"
"If man evolved from apes, why are there still apes and not more people?"
following that line of logic your question should ultimately be: "if everything evolved from primitive life then how is it that there has been more than one species of animal in existence at any one time?". the answer is probably easily understood if you bring to mind the fact that children descend from, in our case, 2 animals and not the entire species.
yeah yeah, mark me down as off-topic.
Yet apes exist, and in great variety... but there is no variety in the developmental stages of humans.
... then as we moved out of Africa, we had no splinter groups, all over the world... no lost chains? We all evolved at almost the same rate (again with minutely small variations)... and now we are equally developed... while the apes remain incredibly diverse (and largely unchanged) ...
The apes we are descended from have not changed much in thousands of years, meanwhile we've developed from apes and there are none of our anscestor species in the world today.
This causes me great confusion.
So basically, you mean to say, we are evolved from apes, and there are some apes that didn't evolve, so they are still around. Many species of apes, really.
Then we have men, who have evolved from a common anscestor, and we just didn't look back, we kept going. We had a number of physiological changes and migrations throughout Africa, but we never diverged into seperate population groups, and every single population group (dispersed throughout Africa) simultaneously evolved (with variations of a thousand years here or there)...
Perhaps you can see why I am confused...
MoM++ - A Classic Expanded - [Master of Magic 1.5]
http://mompp.sourceforge.net/
yeah, basically.
but we never diverged into seperate population groups, and every single population group (dispersed throughout Africa) simultaneously evolved (with variations of a thousand years here or there)... ... then as we moved out of Africa, we had no splinter groups, all over the world... no lost chains
well actually there are plenty of bones to suggest that our species' family tree was not linear at all, and quite messy really with possibly many branches existing at the same time. digs and new finds have suggested that contrary to the perception our growth was one variation after the other, than many variations existed at the same time, and perhaps coexisted. now, on the fact that there is only one variation of human today that makes finding out how the variations either merged, or died off, a fascinating journey.
the question of why variations of apes haven't evolved since the breakoff group that initially formed the family tree of humans, is a very good one. but is only baffling under the assumption that evolution is a constant and steady process with no speeding ups nor slowings down, which of course is clearly not the case given the sequences suggested in the fossil record. whatever evolution is, it appears to happen sporadically, but it does appear to happen (and be happening). i feel like i'm in a shampoo ad.
Flickr site
Reporters sans Frontiere
http://www.rootstrikers.org/