Ok, that makes more sense then. However, I'm not sure that the standard view of sexual selection is that the feathers are a disadvantage that just happen to impress females. As you said, if the tail was a disadvantage that would seem absurd.
What do you think is wrong with the more likely scenario that the tail is neutral to survival, while at the same time being preferred by females thus giving the male a reproductive advantage. I don't know what the peafowl's habitat is like, but the somewhat awkward creature could thrive due to a lack of natural predators. After all, the tail doesn't prevent the bird from flying, and flying is always a strong defense. The females preference could also have a logical basis since individuals that are healthy and well-fed would be better able to produce an extravagant tail.
It's also possible that the tail could have multiple purposes. It could have one of the survival advantages as you outlined so well above as well as the reproductive advantage from sexual selection. There's no reason it has to be only one or the other, is there?
Maybe I'm not following you correctly, but you seem to be assuming that the peacock's tail is an example of a trait making the bird less fit, but then you give several examples of ways it could in fact make the bird more fit. Why do you assume it is a negative when all the reasoning you give is to the contrary?
Why aren't you running some sort of AV on your Linux box? Surely you don't think you're totally immune?
Why is your computer on the network? Surely you don't think you're totally immune?
Total immunity isn't the goal though as you know since you have chosen to plug into the internet despite the risks. A Linux box without any anti-virus is still less likely to get hit with malware than a Windows machine with anti-virus, and for the vast majority of people that's sufficient.
I had an old slashdot account that I registered but never used much. I wish I could remember what it was now, I bet I would look so 133t with that scruffy old thing.
I use KDE. I'm fairly happy with KDE4.1 although I miss some things from KDE3 that are still missing. The original KDE4 release was unusable though, so they've come a long way already.
I haven't tried 4.2 yet, although that's supposed to be another huge improvement. I may just hold off until 2009.1 comes out though, no real hurry.
I agree, I don't think they have anything to do with safety either. How is it even supposed to help? Which is a better deterrent, a $350 fine or the risk of a truck turning you into a pancake?
They just installed one at the intersection outside my apartment. I was sitting at the intersection waiting for a green light and no other cars were around and yet a bright flash from the camera went off in my face not once but twice. I can't stand the damn thing.
Well yeah, it's a lot better since it allows people to chose not to give away their freedom. Sure for those who chose to give it away it doesn't make any difference, but you wouldn't do that, right?
Right. We shouldn't blame the Chinese government for building the dam, instead we should blame them for not building proper schools that can survive potential earthquakes in that region.
That earthquake detector was only for determining the direction of the quake, it could not measure the strength. And has it ever been determine if it even worked properly? I'm sure it was fine at detecting shaking that it had been shaked, but it seems to me that the direction wouldn't be very reliable.
Possibly, but as has been said it's equally possible that it made the inevitable quick weaker by causing a full release now instead of a full release 10 years from now.
Tectonics are complicated, the correct answer is we don't know and probably never will know if the dam made things better or worse.
I got my facts by reading the text of the bills, not from some partisan propaganda site. The law says that that abortions must be allowed by states up to viability. After that it is up to individual states. Viability usually begins around five months. It is a serious stretch of the truth to say that five months is "barely-preborn" and it is an outright lie to say that five months is "just-born".
As an aside I can't help but notice that your only comments have been responses to me. I don't know who you are or why you are stalking me but it is creepy, disgusting, and cowardly behaviour. You should be ashamed of yourself and I wish never to hear from you again. Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, that makes more sense then. However, I'm not sure that the standard view of sexual selection is that the feathers are a disadvantage that just happen to impress females. As you said, if the tail was a disadvantage that would seem absurd.
What do you think is wrong with the more likely scenario that the tail is neutral to survival, while at the same time being preferred by females thus giving the male a reproductive advantage. I don't know what the peafowl's habitat is like, but the somewhat awkward creature could thrive due to a lack of natural predators. After all, the tail doesn't prevent the bird from flying, and flying is always a strong defense. The females preference could also have a logical basis since individuals that are healthy and well-fed would be better able to produce an extravagant tail.
It's also possible that the tail could have multiple purposes. It could have one of the survival advantages as you outlined so well above as well as the reproductive advantage from sexual selection. There's no reason it has to be only one or the other, is there?
Maybe I'm not following you correctly, but you seem to be assuming that the peacock's tail is an example of a trait making the bird less fit, but then you give several examples of ways it could in fact make the bird more fit. Why do you assume it is a negative when all the reasoning you give is to the contrary?
But what that doesn't have is a nice, easy on the eyes e-paper display. That's pretty much the whole point of eBooks.
Why is your computer on the network? Surely you don't think you're totally immune?
Total immunity isn't the goal though as you know since you have chosen to plug into the internet despite the risks. A Linux box without any anti-virus is still less likely to get hit with malware than a Windows machine with anti-virus, and for the vast majority of people that's sufficient.
I had an old slashdot account that I registered but never used much. I wish I could remember what it was now, I bet I would look so 133t with that scruffy old thing.
Nice try but I'm a Linux guy. I just happen to know other stuff too.
I use KDE. I'm fairly happy with KDE4.1 although I miss some things from KDE3 that are still missing. The original KDE4 release was unusable though, so they've come a long way already.
I haven't tried 4.2 yet, although that's supposed to be another huge improvement. I may just hold off until 2009.1 comes out though, no real hurry.
I've been with Mandrake since around 2001. It did have some problems for a few years, but I've been very happy with 2008 and 2009.
Macintosh has always called directories folders, so it predates Windows 3 by at least 6 years.
So vi is ok at 5fps, but vim needs 60fps?
True, but the point was no cars were in the intersection to be photographed. The thing is constantly going off for no reason.
I agree, I don't think they have anything to do with safety either. How is it even supposed to help? Which is a better deterrent, a $350 fine or the risk of a truck turning you into a pancake?
They just installed one at the intersection outside my apartment. I was sitting at the intersection waiting for a green light and no other cars were around and yet a bright flash from the camera went off in my face not once but twice. I can't stand the damn thing.
What's true in theory is entirely irrelevant when in reality shorter yellows have been found to be more dangerous.
But they're also more profitable, so I guess that's a win for the state.
Too bad that them reducing the yellow will probably make the intersection more dangerous.
Anyone who felt threatened by him opening a jar on stage needs to get a grip. Seriously, that would be pathetic.
Read it again, they updated the article.
Well yeah, it's a lot better since it allows people to chose not to give away their freedom. Sure for those who chose to give it away it doesn't make any difference, but you wouldn't do that, right?
Get back to us when Google sends you to Room 101 for refusing to use there service. Until then the comparison falls a wee bit short.
Right. We shouldn't blame the Chinese government for building the dam, instead we should blame them for not building proper schools that can survive potential earthquakes in that region.
That earthquake detector was only for determining the direction of the quake, it could not measure the strength. And has it ever been determine if it even worked properly? I'm sure it was fine at detecting shaking that it had been shaked, but it seems to me that the direction wouldn't be very reliable.
You forgot the part about draining the dam causing another massive earthquake. Oops.
Oh yeah, only Jackie Chan and Jet Li can save us now. Sounds like Kung Fu gold.
False dichotomy. It's better to have many small ones, it's worse to have one large one later.
Possibly, but as has been said it's equally possible that it made the inevitable quick weaker by causing a full release now instead of a full release 10 years from now.
Tectonics are complicated, the correct answer is we don't know and probably never will know if the dam made things better or worse.
I got my facts by reading the text of the bills, not from some partisan propaganda site. The law says that that abortions must be allowed by states up to viability. After that it is up to individual states. Viability usually begins around five months. It is a serious stretch of the truth to say that five months is "barely-preborn" and it is an outright lie to say that five months is "just-born".
As an aside I can't help but notice that your only comments have been responses to me. I don't know who you are or why you are stalking me but it is creepy, disgusting, and cowardly behaviour. You should be ashamed of yourself and I wish never to hear from you again. Thanks.