A good example of this is the Tasmanian wolf (sometimes alternately called the tasmanian tiger), a marsupial that became extinct in 1936 that is related to neither wolves nor tigers. A specimen preserved in ethanol in the 1860's is being examined to see if cloning is possible. The article ran in CNN several months ago.
And bear in mind that inbreeding isn't by definition a bad thing - breeders use it quite often to bring out rare recessive traits (such as color or hair type) in rats, fish, and dogs.
If you could ensure that the (extinct) animal is seually compatable with some living animal, you could get some genetic diversity there, but eventually you would never have a 100% genetically pure example of the extinct species.
-Loooeeee averts his eyes as the Panda peels the poor racoon off it's genitals
I thought they only tasted good to dogs, rats, and cats -- I think humans only used the birds for their plumage.
I've been to several natural history museums in the DC and NY areas, and most of what I've seen in the way of "well preserved" specimens is a pile of bones formed from a composite of multiple Dodo carcasses. They've been extinct for over 300 years - I'm not sure how much viable DNA material you'll find in whatever is left.
-Loooeeee lines up the screen writers of Jurassic Park and whumps them on the head with something heavy
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~dreznik/UPM2000/experi ments.htm
This gives some video demos of the UPM in action - someone else pointed out that these demos are probably speeded up, but at any rate it shows that there isn't perceptible vibration of the "floor" either from looking overhead or from the side.
I imagine mention that the table only rotates imperceptably. That threw me too when I first read it. The idea of a room whipping around like a frisbee made me do a double take.
It requires RealPlayer 8.
-Looooeeeee gets drunk and complains that the room is spinning
I think it's fairly obvious from the article that the author isn't using the same definition as you. I suppose that all he/she was trying to prove was that the slime mold was capable of more complex reactions in the presence of certain stimulii than was previously thought.
I disagree with your current definition of intelligence... From here it looks like you view intelligence as a kind of a binary "either ya got it or ya don't" function. My personal beliefs are that while no, I wouldn't use the adjective "intelligent" in describing a slime mold, their behaviour shows certain aspects (ie problem solving and an inate desire to sustain itself). Parts of the meta-intelligence, if you will.
Bear in mind, a TRULY unintelligent creature would simply bumble-fuck around, maybe finding food, maybe eating it, not caring much one way or the other. It's movement would be truly random, and it wouldn't be effected by either positive or negative reinforcement. Such creatures would almost certainly die out before they could reproduce, unless they were unbelievably resilient to starvation, predators, and intelligent monkeys with a tube of gynolotromin.
If you aren't impressed by what the mighty slime mold can do, at least be impressed with the design. The thing can execute these complex actions as a system, and doesn't even have a central nervous system.
-Loooeee teaches his slime mold to roll over and rot
I think that we need to take a step back and look at what we (and this article) define intelligent to be. The slime mold has clearly demonstrated
a problem solving ability - albeit to a very simple problem. While I wouldn't cheat off of this slime mold on my next calculus test, I would grant
that it's behavior shows some signs of a rudimentary intelligence.
I think that it would be interesting to see how "intelligently" a slime mold could handle more complex problems... what if portions of the maze were laced with a substance that was toxic to the mold? Would it avoid them successfully, or would it kill itself trying to get to the food? What if by going through a more circuitous route, the mold could reach a different type of food - one with more nutrients that would allow it to grow faster? How quickly can the slime mold to rearrange itself for these configurations? Can it "learn" to prize one food source more than another?
Again, this may not be displaying "intelligence" in the cut-and-dried sense that you are mentioning, but it would be a display of how well the various closed loop control systems that guide the slime molds interact with each other (for example, in the poisoned maze example above, how successfully do the "find food" behaviour mechanism and the "avoid danger" mechanism interact?)
But then again, maybe you can view all intelligence as a sum of how efficiently one's stimulus-detection-response closed loop feedback systems interact.
-Loooeeeee steps around the bungee pit and eats a steak dinner
I think that we need to take a step back and look at what we (and this article) define intelligent to be. The slime mold has clearly demonstrated a problem solving ability - albeit to a very simple problem. While I wouldn't cheat off of this slime mold on my next calculus test, I would grant that it's behavior shows some signs of a rudimentary intelligence.
I think that it would be interesting to see how "intelligently" a slime mold could handle more complex problems... what if portions of the maze were laced with a substance that was toxic to the mold? Would it avoid them successfully, or would it kill itself trying to get to the food? What if by going through a more circuitous route, the mold could reach a different type of food - one with more nutrients that would allow it to grow faster? How quickly can the slime mold to rearrange itself for these configurations? Can it "learn" to prize one food source more than another?
Again, this may not be displaying "intelligence" in the cut-and-dried sense that you are mentioning, but it would be a display of how well the various closed loop control systems that guide the slime molds interact with each other (for example, in the poisoned maze example above, how successfully do the "find food" behaviour mechanism and the "avoid danger" mechanism interact?)
But then again, maybe you can view all intelligence as a sum of how efficiently one's stimulus-detection-response closed loop feedback systems interact.
-Loooeeeee steps around the bungee pit and eats a steak dinner
Slashdot Mirror
A good example of this is the Tasmanian wolf (sometimes alternately called the tasmanian tiger), a marsupial that became extinct in 1936 that is related to neither wolves nor tigers. A specimen preserved in ethanol in the 1860's is being examined to see if cloning is possible. The article ran in CNN several months ago.
And bear in mind that inbreeding isn't by definition a bad thing - breeders use it quite often to bring out rare recessive traits (such as color or hair type) in rats, fish, and dogs.
If you could ensure that the (extinct) animal is seually compatable with some living animal, you could get some genetic diversity there, but eventually you would never have a 100% genetically pure example of the extinct species.
-Loooeeee averts his eyes as the Panda peels the poor racoon off it's genitals
I thought they only tasted good to dogs, rats, and cats -- I think humans only used the birds for their plumage.
I've been to several natural history museums in the DC and NY areas, and most of what I've seen in the way of "well preserved" specimens is a pile of bones formed from a composite of multiple Dodo carcasses. They've been extinct for over 300 years - I'm not sure how much viable DNA material you'll find in whatever is left.
-Loooeeee lines up the screen writers of Jurassic Park and whumps them on the head with something heavy
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~dreznik/UPM2000/experi ments.htm
This gives some video demos of the UPM in action - someone else pointed out that these demos are probably speeded up, but at any rate it shows that there isn't perceptible vibration of the "floor" either from looking overhead or from the side.
I imagine mention that the table only rotates imperceptably. That threw me too when I first read it. The idea of a room whipping around like a frisbee made me do a double take.
It requires RealPlayer 8.
-Looooeeeee gets drunk and complains that the room is spinning
I think it's fairly obvious from the article that the author isn't using the same definition as you. I suppose that all he/she was trying to prove was that the slime mold was capable of more complex reactions in the presence of certain stimulii than was previously thought.
I disagree with your current definition of intelligence... From here it looks like you view intelligence as a kind of a binary "either ya got it or ya don't" function. My personal beliefs are that while no, I wouldn't use the adjective "intelligent" in describing a slime mold, their behaviour shows certain aspects (ie problem solving and an inate desire to sustain itself). Parts of the meta-intelligence, if you will.
Bear in mind, a TRULY unintelligent creature would simply bumble-fuck around, maybe finding food, maybe eating it, not caring much one way or the other. It's movement would be truly random, and it wouldn't be effected by either positive or negative reinforcement. Such creatures would almost certainly die out before they could reproduce, unless they were unbelievably resilient to starvation, predators, and intelligent monkeys with a tube of gynolotromin.
If you aren't impressed by what the mighty slime mold can do, at least be impressed with the design. The thing can execute these complex actions as a system, and doesn't even have a central nervous system.
-Loooeee teaches his slime mold to roll over and rot
Apparently my editor doesn't like white space...sorry about that! ;D
_ _
Here it is again, easier to read.
_______________________________________________
I think that we need to take a step back and look at what we (and this article) define intelligent to be. The slime mold has clearly demonstrated
a problem solving ability - albeit to a very simple problem. While I wouldn't cheat off of this slime mold on my next calculus test, I would grant
that it's behavior shows some signs of a rudimentary intelligence.
I think that it would be interesting to see how "intelligently" a slime mold could handle more complex problems... what if portions of the maze were laced with a substance that was toxic to the mold? Would it avoid them successfully, or would it kill itself trying to get to the food? What if by going through a more circuitous route, the mold could reach a different type of food - one with more nutrients that would allow it to grow faster? How quickly can the slime mold to rearrange itself for these configurations? Can it "learn" to prize one food source more than another?
Again, this may not be displaying "intelligence" in the cut-and-dried sense that you are mentioning, but it would be a display of how well the various closed loop control systems that guide the slime molds interact with each other (for example, in the poisoned maze example above, how successfully do the "find food" behaviour mechanism and the "avoid danger" mechanism interact?)
But then again, maybe you can view all intelligence as a sum of how efficiently one's stimulus-detection-response closed loop feedback systems interact.
-Loooeeeee steps around the bungee pit and eats a steak dinner
I think that we need to take a step back and look at what we (and this article) define intelligent to be. The slime mold has clearly demonstrated a problem solving ability - albeit to a very simple problem. While I wouldn't cheat off of this slime mold on my next calculus test, I would grant that it's behavior shows some signs of a rudimentary intelligence. I think that it would be interesting to see how "intelligently" a slime mold could handle more complex problems... what if portions of the maze were laced with a substance that was toxic to the mold? Would it avoid them successfully, or would it kill itself trying to get to the food? What if by going through a more circuitous route, the mold could reach a different type of food - one with more nutrients that would allow it to grow faster? How quickly can the slime mold to rearrange itself for these configurations? Can it "learn" to prize one food source more than another? Again, this may not be displaying "intelligence" in the cut-and-dried sense that you are mentioning, but it would be a display of how well the various closed loop control systems that guide the slime molds interact with each other (for example, in the poisoned maze example above, how successfully do the "find food" behaviour mechanism and the "avoid danger" mechanism interact?) But then again, maybe you can view all intelligence as a sum of how efficiently one's stimulus-detection-response closed loop feedback systems interact. -Loooeeeee steps around the bungee pit and eats a steak dinner