[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

I am always teetering on the edge of doing this, not because I think it's a good idea, but just because I really, truly love fruit...

1
Seeking rock art! (lemmy.world)

Heyo!

I'm looking for some rock art. I've been familiarising myself bit by bit but I'd really appreciate being pointed to some sites by the following criteria (in order of importance):

  • the best-preserved rock art, a la Lascaux & such (and/or the most striking--which is not quite the same thing! emphasis on the former since the latter is more subjective :))

  • especially which depicts non-human life (other animals & so on) or part-humans (but the less anthropocentric the more it appeals to me)

  • and especially anything from the neolithic or (bonus points!!) before! Paleolithic is my main interest, I'm not really interested in anything after literacy :)

Thank you SO much!! Any advice on specific sites or where/how to search under this criteria super appreciated!!

14
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/anarchism@lemmy.ml

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16439577

What have been some anarchist organizations or approaches to the problems of addiction and recovery? I've done a little bit of reading on the anarchist library and I'll continue with that. I know there are concepts of radical sobriety as well as critiques of the hierarchy within twelve step programs and the idea of addict as identity. I'm interested in any perspectives and ideas.

Something I personally find acutely annoying about recovery programs is that they're almost solipsistic not just about the profits involved and the larger political historical and economic story of addiction. Maybe it's taboo because it's not something one can solve the same way one can make choices in one's own life, but I feel like a bit of a pariah every time I want to remind people that we arent just fighting ourselves but the people who actively make money on our suffering. To me right now anarchism is the best model to describe reality, so I want to know how people who share this model have dealt with and thought about these urgent issues. Keen to be introduced to literature or communities in this vein

[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

Yes, I don't think I have another app but more features on some apps I use (Smartdock, Joplin, Librera, Rimusic) would be slightly life-changing.

18

Plants react to and communicate with their environment in sometimes surprising ways that enhance their survival in changing conditions. Does this constitute intelligence? Can you have intelligence without a brain? What do we owe plants? Maybe a little overlong and meandering but important piece. It's a decade old so I wonder how the research has developed since then.

17
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/houseplants@mander.xyz

So, obviously, a beginner wants to start with a hardy plant, and I guess a cheap one, and one suited for the conditions the houseplant will be living in, and one they like the look of. But my intention with this hobby is to become more connected with my environment, not to exploit it in the way most convenient for me. I want to understand: what is a good, or minimally harmful, houseplant? Are the ecological footprints very different between different houseplants? I've been told that if you live above a certain floor on an apartment planting natives isn't important since pollinators don't get up to your level anyway--is that accurate? Do people ever uhhh...just like scoop up plants growing around them and just pot them and grow them at home? Are all plants that would thrive as houseplants commercially available or is what's commercially available mostly influenced by other factors like subjective/cultural aesthetic value & hardiness under transport conditions & stuff like that?

80
submitted 5 months ago by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

he knows nothing and genuinely thinks he’s doing a good job.

seems like the first step to improving is being given information on how you're doing, and the second is being mentored/trained?

[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago

Why were there trackers initially?

72
submitted 6 months ago by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/til@lemmy.world
[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Nobody has to take it seriously but I suspect it's more fun if they do. Some writers plot and foreshadow as baroquely as if they were building up a philosophical argument. I just read a review of a novel I'd read and the reviewer quoted some beautiful sentences I have no memory of.

[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Good for others but doesn't work for me as it's not on mobile sadly. There are several mobile translation extensions but they all rely on Google/Microsoft/DeepL & I don't know how to assess the privacy consequnces of that.

11
submitted 6 months ago by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/books@lemmy.world

These past few months I've come back to reading novels for the first time, really, since I was a kid. I just read them an alternative to scrolling, though, so I don't really pay much attention. When I sit down to watch a film, I try to make sure my mind is clear, my environment is undistracting, and I try to watch observantly and engage on multiple levels. Not always easy to maintain that level of attention even for a 1.5-3h movie, to try to do so for a novel seems unreasonable. I've felt mostly indifferent about the novels I've been reading during this streak. I had one moment where I felt moved but I can't really speak eloquently as to why or how. I have too many goals that matter infinitely more to me to make becoming a more refined conscientious fiction reader a goal, but I'm curious by-the-by how other (more experienced?) people approaach their reading.

35
submitted 6 months ago by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

Especially on an android browser like Mull (especially) or DDG.

54
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/biodiversity@mander.xyz

Their mothers were Russian sturgeons—large carnivores with creamy bellies, short, rounded snouts, and green, dragon-like scales. Their fathers were American paddlefish—smooth-skinned filter feeders with sensitive, elongated snouts. “Sturddlefish,” as these hybrids were nicknamed after researchers in Hungary announced their creation last month, go shockingly far beyond classic crossbreeds like mules and ligers, whose parent species sit closely together on the tree of life. Sturddlefish result from the merger of different taxonomic families.

“I’m still confused. My jaw is still on the floor,” said Prosanta Chakrabarty, an ichthyologist at Louisiana State University and the curator of fishes at its Museum of Natural Science. “It’s like if they had a cow and a giraffe make a baby.” Then he quickly corrected himself, because the lineages of those two ruminants split only a few dozen million years ago. The evolutionary paths of paddlefish and sturgeons diverged 184 million years ago. For those fish to breed is more like “if a human came out of a platypus egg,” he said.

Hybrids are often shrugged off as freaky living violations of the rules that keep species distinct. But scientific interest in them has grown with mounting evidence that, in nature, hybrids can be important both in the emergence of new species and in the conservation of species on the brink of extinction.

Yet the new sturddlefish are so radical that they’re shaking up scientists’ understanding of what kinds of hybrids may be possible and which species might interbreed successfully. Studies of the new fish could also provide deep insights into how genomes work more generally.

The successful hybridization of these sturgeons and paddlefish was unintentional, but it wasn’t precisely an accident. In fact, the researchers were counting on the cross to fail so that they could learn something about how sex is determined in Russian sturgeons.

In mammals and birds, male and female sex is usually determined by sex-specific genes on sex-specific chromosomes. But with fish, anything goes: Some fish have sex chromosomes, while others take sexual-development cues from their environments or transition from one sex to the other. No one is quite sure how sturgeons do it, but some people are keen to know because sturgeon eggs are highly prized as caviar (some high-end caviar sells for more than $180 an ounce). If researchers can figure out how to farm Russian sturgeon stocks that are mostly female, it could alleviate the problematic overfishing of wild populations.

One way to determine what sets the sex of Russian sturgeons is gynogenesis—a form of asexual reproduction in which an egg and a sperm fuse but only the mother’s genes are transmitted to the resulting embryo. “You want to activate the egg, but you don’t want any DNA contribution from the male,” explained Ken Semmens, an aquaculture biologist at Kentucky State University. Gynogenesis sometimes occurs naturally among fish, but marine biologists and the aquaculture industry also use it as a tool for studying sex determination. With gynogenesis, all the offspring are essentially half-clones of their mother. So if all of them are females, then you know that females are determined by having a pair of identical sex chromosomes (as in mammals). If the offspring are all males, then females are the sex with two different chromosomes (which is the case in birds). If only some are males … well, then an environmental factor is also in play.

Last year at the Research Institute for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Hungary, the aquaculture engineer Jenő Káldy and the fish ecologist Attila Mozsár were experimenting with gynogenesis on Russian sturgeons under the direction of the aquacultural geneticist Miklós Bercsényi of the University of Pannonia. To that end, the Hungarian researchers needed sperm that couldn’t possibly fertilize the sturgeon eggs.

Paddlefish sperm looked like a safe bet. American paddlefish (Polyodon spathula) are diploid—with two full sets of each chromosome—and have 60 pairs of chromosomes. Russian sturgeons (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii) are tetraploid—with four sets of each chromosome—and have about 250 chromosomes (the chromosomes are so numerous, and some are so small, that it’s hard to count them reliably). Nearly 200 million years of independent evolution should have seeded the two species’ DNA with countless genetic mismatches and incompatibilities—from missing or added genes to rearranged or relocated genes, mutational tweaks, or variations in gene expression. It seemed certain that the paddlefish-sturgeon hybrid cells would struggle to figure out how to line up their chromosomes during cell division, or to know what genes to turn on or off.

Moreover, aquaculturists had previously used sperm from paddlefish to trigger gynogenesis in other sturgeon species and vice versa, and none of those experiments had ever produced crossbreeds. The Hungarian team had every reason to be confident that their fish could not hybridize.

But when Káldy and Mozsár exposed the Russian sturgeon eggs to healthy paddlefish sperm as a control for their experiment, they were stunned to see that the vast majority of the eggs hatched into live hybrid offspring. “They called me and told me that something’s wrong, because all of the control is living,” Bercsényi recalled. “I said, ‘Jenő, you made a big mistake. Please repeat the experiment.’” And so Káldy did—but the result was the same.

“We never wanted to play around with hybridization,” said Mozsár. “It was just a negative control, which found, somehow, a way to live.”

At first, Káldy didn’t believe the fry were hybrids: Because they looked just like regular sturgeons as youngsters, they might have come from spontaneous gynogenesis or some other “more reasonable explanation,” he said. But a genomic analysis by Gyöngyvér Fazekas, a colleague at the Research Institute for Fisheries and Aquaculture, and Balázs Kovács, an aquacultural geneticist at Hungary’s Szent István University, confirmed that the team indeed had more than a hundred hybrids growing in their tanks.

As Bercsényi’s team described it in their recent paper in Genes, some of the hybrids have three copies of each chromosome, a half-genome from each parent. But other hybrids have five copies of each chromosome: They somehow received the equivalent of their sturgeon mom’s full genome plus a half-genome from their paddlefish dad. The bodies of the sturddlefish combine characteristics from both parents, but the ones with more sturgeon DNA look more like their mother—they have more of the distinctive sturgeon scales called scutes, for instance.

How can these seemingly impossible hybrids exist?

Chakrabarty’s hunch is that the answer lies in the relatively slow rate of evolution that occurs in this group of fish. The Polyodontidae (paddlefishes) and Acipenseridae (sturgeons) are the last living families in the order Acipenseriformes, and studies suggest that both have very slow mutation rates. Despite the eons of independent evolution separating them, maybe their genomes just haven’t diverged enough to prohibit hybridization. But that raises the question of why previous hybridization attempts between sturgeons and paddlefish failed.

Semmens leans toward a different hypothesis: that the successful hybridization has to do with the Russian sturgeon’s extra-large genome. Genomicists think that the ancestors of sturgeons were diploid until all their chromosomes doubled and the fish became tetraploid. But only some species—including Russian sturgeons—retained their extra chromosomes. As a result, it’s possible that the Russian sturgeon’s genome carries enough redundancies and variations on genes to help the hybrids survive mismatches in their parents’ DNA.

Back in the 1980s, Semmens attempted to make a sturddlefish by combining sperm from shovelnose sturgeons with eggs from paddlefish; the eggs started to develop but then quit. Because both of those fish species are considered diploids, neither had “extra” DNA to offer as a tetraploid might. “Perhaps that’s the reason why their hybrid worked and our hybrid didn’t,” Semmens mused.

Getting to the bottom of this mystery will inevitably reveal a lot about how reproductive barriers work at the genetic level—not just in primitive fishes but in other animals. “Studying this type of hybrid can help a lot for understanding evolutionary processes,” Bercsényi said, “and they offer good tools also for studying the function of the genes.” For instance, sturgeons and paddlefish both have lots of super-small microchromosomes that are poorly understood. Chakrabarty is eager to see if sturddlefish can help researchers understand how microchromosomes function.

Bercsényi’s team doesn’t plan on making any more sturddlefish right away, but they’ll collaborate with researchers in Japan and elsewhere to study them. If the hybrids prove hardier in captivity than their parent fish—or if they produce more eggs—it’s more than likely that someone will want more of them.

Yet right now, Bercsényi cautioned, it’s not clear whether the hybrids will produce eggs or whether those eggs will be viable. Ichthyologists can’t even tell the males and females apart before the fish are two years old. Given the slow maturation of both parent species, Bercsényi says, it will take a “minimum of three years” of raising the fish in warm water before it’s known if they are fertile.

44
submitted 6 months ago by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/antiwork@lemmy.ml

I feel like any young person I speak to who is plugged into the English-speaking world will at least have encountered anti-work discourse. I've heard of people lying flat in China and nearby countries. Is there comparable discussion going on in your language? What does it look like?

[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

One of the recent Facebook whistleblowers said her version of social media was her & her friends sharing news articles in a Signal group chat. That's, like, my wet dream.

[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago

But I have no reason to believe Discord is even an iota less evil than Facebook.

I wish I could loosen up and enjoy malicious tech but like I said, I just can't unring that bell, even though it makes my life meaningfully worse. Iykyk

66

For better or for worse, while growing up my social life was mostly online: gaia online, livejournal, deviantart, tumblr, and many others. I've heard of social media interaction be described as social junk food & even as I want to defend the many genuine, meaningful online relationships I had, I'm sympathetic: of course it's better to laugh together, to touch each other, to see each other's facial expressions, to do projects together, to tangibly help each other, to be part of each others' physical lives. Of course tech companies prey on our increasing loneliness and need for interaction the way that Coca Cola preys on thirst: claiming to cure it but exacerbating it and making us ill at the same time (and killing workers as they do it). But lots of people are in situations that keep them isolated that they can't easily change: disability, living rurally, working two jobs, living in places where they can't speak the language well, and the internet can provide a solution.

My life circumstances enable me to live the life I've always wanted to live, but it comes at a few sacrifices, the biggest being a social life, particularly a social life with people who share my values and who I feel comfortable speaking intimately with. There are lots of ways I can think of to make friends online, but mostly they involve having conversations on spyware platforms. Now that I'm privacypilled I can't unring that bell. It's as comfortable for me to make a friendship on a facebook group as it would be meeting a stranger for lunch in an extremely crowded public venue and have to scream our entire conversation perpetually. At least if they were willing to switch to Signal or something at some point we could metaphorically go to a quiet cafe and speak freely, but even the dude I talked to who talked about the book he read on techno-feudalism ditched it after trying it for a grand total of five minutes with me.

I fucking hate most tech companies and basically can't tolerate mainstream social media. My IRL prospects are what they are, I could change them only at great cost to myself. But, embracing my milkless cloth monkey mom, I have to admit sociality, love, and understanding are needs: their absence won't kill me as quickly as starvation, but it's probably up there with sedentism. Anybody else in the same pinch? How do you cope?

[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

In the article they talk about extremely subtle pronounciation changes. It doesn't seem like it was a conscious decision.

I used to have a job where I was the only non-Indian on my team and I didn't go as far as to develop an accent (also I went home every day lol unlike these guys) but I felt like I was unintentionally picking up some Indian affectations/word orders.

1
submitted 6 months ago by tributarium@lemmy.world to c/music@lemmy.world
[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Thanks for your response. It's not just the term "ownership" I am frustrated with, because there's a reason we use the term: it's accurate. I think in an ethical world we would be building a society and environment that allowed us to be good neighbours to cats (and all other forms of life) rather than forcefully assimilating them into our homes and taking away all of their freedom. I think veganism is a horizon most people have considered (even if just only barely) because of the brutality of factory farms but people hardly have the imagination to acknowledge the cruelty of what goes on in their own homes and alternatives (for obvious reasons: it's relatively easy to not eat animal products, very difficult for any one individual to make a non-human-friendly impact on the environment around them). I think the way you think about your cat is fair. What prompted my rant was the kind of attitude that someone who responded to this post earlier had--"are you kidding, OBVIOUSLY my dog loves me, OBVIOUSLY I am entitled to make decisions about its reproductive rights, because even though he's my best buddy he's my inferior!" I find the "I'll eat an extra steak for you" attitude vile but I almost never encounter it IRL whereas almost everyone I know will project the most convenient possible narrative and emotions onto their pets and praise themselves for keeping them. I mean, as I say in OP, it is what it is, it's arguably better for a cat to be indoors in this messed-up world. But only arguably and ambivalently so. It's most people's cavalier attitudes about it that I find to be inexcusable and diagnostic of deep cruelty.

[-] tributarium@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

I've been listening to Karen Bakker often lately (I may even read her book sometime) and if what she says about AI and other new technology being able to give us a method of interspecies communication is true...jesus christ, the moral revolution will be copernican.

view more: next ›

tributarium

joined 7 months ago