Profile

Cover photo
Jorge Rangel
945 followers|114,260 views
AboutPostsCollections

Stream

Jorge Rangel

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Probably the most interesting, and actually developer-relevant announcement of #io16

Sheets and Slides are getting fully-fledged APIs that basically let you do everything you could do yourself manually.
View original post
1
Add a comment...

Jorge Rangel

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
You can start experimenting with Daydream, by using Cardboard and one phone as headset (actually only Nexus 6P supported for that), and another phone as controller. #io16
3 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Jorge Rangel

Shared publicly  - 
 
A few months back, Luxembourg—a tiny country better known for world-class pastries—announced its intention to become a leader in asteroid mining. Now, Luxembourg has revealed the first step in its plan to fill the banking vaults with space-grade platinum: a small, water-powered spacecraft.
2
1
Add a comment...

Jorge Rangel

Shared publicly  - 
2
Add a comment...

Jorge Rangel

Shared publicly  - 
 
A web browser for the power user. Forget the browser window full of unsorted, jammed tabs. Alloy is built up on Tasks, of which every has its own Tablist. You only see the relevant Tabs for your current Task.
1
Add a comment...
In his circles
1,836 people
Have him in circles
945 people
jay kanakiya's profile photo
Ramlan Setiawan's profile photo
Justin Abrahms's profile photo
tika preneur's profile photo
Pedro Imai's profile photo
Malik Mahtab's profile photo
Matt Senter's profile photo
Vladimir Svydenko's profile photo
Tusheef Shouket's profile photo

Communities

30 communities

Jorge Rangel

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Genetically Engineering Super-Intelligent Humans

Point
Nautilus has an interesting discussion on the thousands (10k) of genetic variations that contribute to or are correlated with human intelligence, and with single variants being responsible for less than 1 point of IQ http://nautil.us/issue/18/genius/super_intelligent-humans-are-coming. Statistical analysis indicates that when an individual possess just 100 more of these positive variants above the population average then they will enjoy an IQ boost of one standard deviation, or an extra 15 points. Swapping out all 10,000 variants in an individual for the optimal positive variants might, in theory, result in that person having an IQ of 1,000 - if you just go by the statistical analysis. It isn’t really clear whether an IQ this high really has much meaning, especially considering human IQ is quoted as just double or triple that of chimpanzees. Regardless, this analysis makes it seem conservative that we can pass the IQ 200 or 300 mark.

The piece discusses support for this in more detail but if it turns out to be true then well within 10 years we will have the technology to fairly easily ensure any particular human baby conceived via IVF will have a 15 point IQ boost. There will be very real consequences for any country that bans such technology.

Counterpoint
PZ Myers disagrees however and attempts to dismiss the proposal in a thoroughly disparaging and ad hominem manner http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/04/05/superbrains-will-not-come-out-of-a-test-tube/. Resisting the urge to dismiss Myers as a buffoon, at a basic level he simply isn’t convinced that boosting absolute human intelligence is a desirable thing, and would rather indirectly boost intelligence as a whole by improving global nutrition and education. His objections boil down to two things. First, that such a thing would be technically impossible; but this seems utterly unrealistic given the rapid pace of technology development in genetics, CRISPR, and embryo editing.

Second, that such a thing would be theoretically impossible, and quotes evolutionary arguments that (i) if it was possible evolution would have already done it, and (ii) humans are so multidimensional that tweaking one variant for one trait invariably involves compromise for other traits; basically that other things in the organism would suffer.

Rebuttal
Stephen Hsu, the author of the original Nautilus post concisely responds to Myer’s counter-arguments with a rebuttal on his private blog here http://infoproc.blogspot.com.au/2016/04/this-is-for-pz-meyers.html. The rebuttal presents some very straight-forward arguments from basic population genetics that support the proposal, clears up Myer’s confusion between genes and variants, states the completely non-controversial fact that cognitive ability is highly heritable, and presents data supporting the fact that there are many thousands of variants responsible for IQ. Myer’s response to this rebuttal was to dismiss Hsu as a dilettante.

Bonus Coverage
Finally, Scott Alexander from SlateStarCodex weighs in to take apart the multidimensionality claim of Myers http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/05/04/myers-race-car-versus-the-general-fitness-factor/. Turns out it is hard to find traits that are traded off against increases in intelligence, which would otherwise be easy to find if the multidimensionality claim were true. People with high IQ live longer, are taller, healthier during childhood, commit less crime, are fitter, have lower rates of stroke, diabetes, and heart disease, and are possibly more attractive. As usual Scott provides additional, substantial, and fascinating thoughts and analysis that are well worth reading.

I’m reminded of a Nick Bostrom quote:
Far from being the smartest possible biological species, we are probably better thought of as the stupidest possible biological species capable of starting a technological civilization—a niche we filled because we got there first, not because we are in any sense optimally adapted to it.

If it is almost trivially possible to grant a person an additional 15 points of IQ with little to no risk of downside, is it unethical not to do so? 
26 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Jorge Rangel

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Winter Is Coming for These Argentine Ant Invaders

Those garden-variety ants in your kitchen are anything but ordinary.

Most likely, they’re Argentine ants, recognizable by their telltale straight lines and proficiency at capturing food, like that errant drop of honey on your counter, with stunning speed.

For about 200 years, the Argentine ant expansion story has been the slow-moving train wreck of myrmecology, the study of ants. From remote origins in the Paraná River valley in Paraguay and Argentina, this virulent invasive species has moved out to claim much of the world’s most desirable territory, whether you’re an ant or a human.

Wherever they go, Argentine ants eliminate the competition — mostly other ants, but sometimes bees, termites and ladybugs — with a take-no-prisoners approach. Invade, dismember, consume. Repeat. Resistance is futile. The basic wisdom among ant scientists is that if you see Argentines, it’s already too late.

The invasion got personal for Deborah Gordon, a professor of biology who studies ants at Stanford University, 12 years ago when Argentine ants broke into her lab overnight. The invaders destroyed a harvester ant colony she was studying, killing the queen. Harvester queens live deep underground, and acquiring one for study is a back-breaking process. “They’re very precious,” she recalled, “I don’t think I’ll ever recover.”

So you can imagine Gordon’s surprise when researchers in her lab found one common native California ant species thriving behind enemy lines, in Argentine ant territory near Palo Alto. This stubborn survivor is called the winter ant, and its persistence, through a novel defensive strategy, seems to offer hope that invasions on the scale of the Argentine ant can be halted, and even reversed.

Argentine ants first came to the U.S. through New Orleans onboard coffee ships from Brazil in the 1890s. They have since made landfall in California, Japan and the Mediterranean coast, following the many sea and land routes of human commerce. “What we’ve learned is they don’t become established at a certain distance from people,” said Gordon, “They need us.”

As early as the 1970s, scientists began to notice a peculiar fact about the Argentine ant and its unusual success.

In the ant world, colony-mates all carry the same smell, embedded in the waxy stuff that makes their exoskeletons shiny. A single tap of antennae is enough to tell friend from foe.

Usually, when ants from different colonies are put together, even from the same species, they fight. Warfare among colonies is a major factor keeping ant populations in balance. But Argentine worker ants can be combined from colonies in Spain, Japan and California, and they will recognize each other — they won’t fight.

Without this natural check, researchers say, a single colony of ants from Argentina has spread across continents and oceans. “They escaped the war zone,” said Brian Whyte, a Ph.D. student in evolutionary biology at UC Berkeley, “and the colony doesn’t seem to have a limit.”

A 2010 paper called the so-called super-colony “the most populous known animal society.”

Its trillions upon trillions of inhabitants dwarf the human population by a long shot.

Not all Argentine ants get along so well. Scientists, including David Holway from UC San Diego and Neil Tsutsui from UC Berkeley, have mapped out a handful of super-colonies worldwide. “They have very clean, demarcated boundaries,” said Holway.

The picture that seemed to emerge amounted to a battle of empires dividing up the world, yet still fighting bitterly wherever their territories met.

But Jasper Ridge, a 1,200-acre Stanford preserve in the hills west of Palo Alto, is different. In 1993, Gordon’s laboratory began tracking ant populations there. At the time, Jasper Ridge was unconquered territory for the Argentines, but they already had been spotted.

“It’s unusual to be able to monitor an invasion,” Gordon said. She predicted that within one to five years, it would all be over. “I thought they would just move quickly through.”

A series of Ph.D. students conducting the field research, including Nicole Heller, who tracked ants at Jasper for six years, began to notice a different trend. One species of native ant was holding its own inside the boundary of the Argentine advance. “They were coping, increasing their distribution over time,” said Heller, who’s now the director of conservation science at the Peninsula Open Space Trust, an environmental organization in Palo Alto.

The winter ant has several advantages over the Argentine: deeper nests, a different cycle of seasonal activity. But other ant species with similar advantages have fallen before the Argentine onslaught. What, the Stanford researchers wondered, was different here?

In 2008, Gordon was using the ant counts at Jasper Ridge to teach undergraduates about invasion ecology. In their final project, where Argentine and winter ants were observed side-by-side in controlled conditions, one group of students claimed to have made a novel discovery. Winter ants, the students found, showed a distinct behavior when they were put on the defensive.

The students watched the winter ants wave their abdomens at their enemies, known as “gaster-flagging” in ant circles, before a cloudy liquid blob appeared at the tip. Approaching the secretion sent the Argentines reeling away. Touching it could kill them.

Gordon admitted she was skeptical.

“I didn’t completely believe it,” she said, “but by the end of the class I was persuaded there was enough there to explore.”

Over the next two years, the students repeated and studied the winter ant’s apparently novel defensive behavior. They also analyzed the the secretion. (Turns out it comes from the same gland used by the ants’ ancestors, wasps, to sting.)

By the time the students’ data was published, asserting that the winter ant’s defensive secretion “may account for its ability to persist” in Argentine-invaded territory, the ant counts at Jasper Ridge had long surpassed Gordon’s initial expectation of one to five years. The ant population data, now at 20 years and counting, bears out the students’ findings.

In fact, the preserve’s winter ants are not only surviving, they’re now pushing back, opening up space for other native ant populations to rebound.

Whether scientists (and the pest control industry) can take a lesson from the winter ant or will remain on the sidelines of this epic ant battle is still unclear.

“Some invasive species may be successful in the beginning, but in the long term may not do as well,” Gordon said. “It’s about how it plays out over time.”

Link to article: http://ww2.kqed.org/science/2016/05/03/winter-is-coming-for-the-argentine-ant-invaders/

Links to researchers:
Deborah Gordon, a professor of biology, Stanford University: https://web.stanford.edu/~dmgordon/

Brian Whyte, a Ph.D. student in evolutionary biology at UC Berkeley: https://ourenvironment.berkeley.edu/people/brian-whyte

David Holway, Professor and Vice Chair of Ecology, Behavior, Evolution, UC San Diego: http://invasivespecies.ucsd.edu/

Neil Tsutsui, Associate Professor, Vice Chair for Instruction
Department of Environmental Science, Policy & Management, UC Berkeley: http://scheckek.wix.com/tsutsuilab
View original post
1
Add a comment...
Jorge's Collections
People
In his circles
1,836 people
Have him in circles
945 people
jay kanakiya's profile photo
Ramlan Setiawan's profile photo
Justin Abrahms's profile photo
tika preneur's profile photo
Pedro Imai's profile photo
Malik Mahtab's profile photo
Matt Senter's profile photo
Vladimir Svydenko's profile photo
Tusheef Shouket's profile photo
Communities
30 communities
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Apps with Google+ Sign-in
  • Flappy Bird
Story
Tagline
Android developer
Introduction
Some of my interests: Android Development, Machine Learning, Artificial Neural Networks, Deep Learning, Python, Google App Engine, Biology, Bioinformatics, Futurism, Game Development.
Bragging rights
I convinced two persons to switch to Android phones
Links
Other profiles