5 comments

  • ileonichwiesz3 hours ago
    Very interesting topic, but a strange choice of source. I&#x27;d recommend these instead:<p>Coller foundation press release: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.jeremycollerfoundation.org&#x2F;news-and-insights&#x2F;press-releases&#x2F;scientists-win-us100-000-in-2026-coller-dolittle-prize" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.jeremycollerfoundation.org&#x2F;news-and-insights&#x2F;pre...</a><p>The actual publication in Science: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.science.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1126&#x2F;science.ads8482" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.science.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1126&#x2F;science.ads8482</a>
    • HarHarVeryFunny15 minutes ago
      Here&#x27;s a non-paywalled version of the research.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.biorxiv.org&#x2F;content&#x2F;10.1101&#x2F;2024.11.14.623689v1.full.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.biorxiv.org&#x2F;content&#x2F;10.1101&#x2F;2024.11.14.623689v1....</a>
    • MathMonkeyMan2 hours ago
      It does have the title going for it.
      • technothrasher1 hour ago
        The title doesn&#x27;t match the paper though. People had <i>already</i> decoded the bird calls. What the paper was giving evidence to was that the <i>birds</i> themselves are cognitively decoding the calls.
        • t-writescode1 hour ago
          I’m glad we’re doing this research. It makes me wonder how much time and potential we’ve wasted over the years actively assuming non-human animals were just rote automatons.<p>It seems like a meaningful amount of science has been spent on systematically dismantling pre-existing prejudice over the last hundreds of years (and thousands in some cases and cultures).<p><pre><code> All humans are human. Babies can feel pain. Plants feel. Animals think. </code></pre> Just … So much wasted time on what should have always been seen as true.<p>I get that some cultures already thought some of these things, but many of these were sadly not prevailing.
          • adjejmxbdjdn1 hour ago
            I don’t believe there’s any evidence behind plant’s feeling or thinking.<p>Other than that you’re right.
            • why_at47 minutes ago
              Yeah I think there&#x27;s a lot of science news about how plants are capable of more than the average person thinks, but people tend to conflate that with some kind of conscious experience.
    • kiproping3 hours ago
      Thank you, I was also looking for a better source and a link to the paper. I thought the paper was this older one <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;s41467-018-06394-9" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;s41467-018-06394-9</a> from 2018.
  • bluechair39 minutes ago
    I remember hearing about an interesting paper; it argued that Zebra finch songs were as complex as recursively enumerable languages on the Chomsky hierarchy. I wanted to see if I could find it but came across another paper arguing that their embedded context sensitivity can be explained by simpler rules.<p><pre><code> https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pnas.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1073&#x2F;pnas.0908113106 </code></pre> Just the same, these little fellows are some of the cutest on our planet.<p>Left this comment as another computer science connection.
  • ChuckMcM11 minutes ago
    No doubts the crows are all having a good laugh at our expense.
  • AndrewKemendo45 minutes ago
    Another win for machine learning:<p>&gt;She then applied machine learning to analyse how information was encoded in the calls before testing her findings through behavioural experiments.