• rustyfish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 days ago

    Big AFAIK: The anatomically correct human first appeared roughly 300.000 years ago. In the next 200.000 years they almost certainly genocided all their relatives. After a couple of behavioural changes here and there they had a mutation about 50.000 years ago which changed their brains, improved their communication skills immensely and they finally and truly became what humans are today. But they still wandered around until they finally started growing shit in the ground about 13.000 years ago. But it took about 7.000 additional years for some nerd to start writing roughly 5.000 years ago.

    So yeah. The milestones are happening in ever shorter intervals.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      5 days ago

      There was no mutation, or at least there’s no evidence for it. The big change 50.000 years ago likely happened because population density finally became large enough to meaningfully transmit and preserve culture.

    • tetris11@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      5 days ago

      They genocided each other too.

      The skeletal remains that we find of males at dig sites have vast amounts of damage to them, and we find significantly less women and girl skeletal remains. Aeons later and the heterogeneity of the Y chromosome is suspiciously low in contrast to that shown in mtDNA. That’s a lot of killing and raping

      • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Wait, I am stupid. Does that mean that many men died, and only few procreated? And assuming the birth rates are the same, why wouldn’t there be women skeletons? After all, everyone dies, whether in a fist fight over who gets to have sex at 14 or of cancer at like 70?

        • tetris11@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          Does that mean that many men died, and only few procreated?

          Actively bludgeoned by another tribe and then thrown in a pit. These are young men, I should add

          why wouldn’t there be women skeletons?

          They are not killed, but captured and carried away as spoils of war to the conquering tribe

          • Honytawk@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            5 days ago

            They are not killed, but captured and carried away as spoils of war to the conquering tribe

            So why aren’t there women skeletons at those conquering tribes? They had to die somewhere.

            • arrow74@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              I believe you misread, they said a high number of males with evidence of trauma. Basically a very large percentage of male skeletons showed damage. The original comment didn’t say there were no female skeletons.

              Also depending on the dig site mass graves of men killed in combat are common. Those would obviously lack women.

            • tetris11@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              5 days ago

              So why aren’t there women skeletons at those conquering tribes? They had to die somewhere.

              There probably are, but we don’t stumble across them as easily as we do the mass grave dig sites I think

    • arrow74@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I wouldn’t say genocided per se. We have pretty significant percentages of non-homo sapien DNA. Which implies a decently high degree of inter-breeding.

      My money is on a combination of inter-breeding leading to genetic extinction through dilution, resource competition (strained by changing environmental conditions), and of course inter-group conflict.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 days ago

        There’s good evidence that homo sapiens didn’t invent the shovel. That was technology almost certainly taken from another human species, which suggests a fairly integrated society. You could imagine different species of human all living together, it is certainly behaviour that has been observed in other primates so there is precedent.

        • DigitalAudio@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 days ago

          Damn, imagine the levels of segregation, speciesm and genocide we would see if other human species had thrived and grown like us.

    • brisk@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Source on that mutation? 50 000 years ago humans were already spread across Africa, Asia and Australia. That makes the idea of a critical mutation after that sound implausible

    • ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Extrapolating from this, major milestones would happen faster and faster until 2023, where all remaining major milestones happened simultaneously with the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT 4. For only $200/mo, you can experience this magical moment for yourself with unlimited access to our best ChatGPT models!

          • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            Oh that too.

            For context, the Grox are a species in Spore, the evolution simulator from 2008, made by Maxis (which got bought by EA).

            In there, the Grox are an aggressive species, which control a vast empire around the Milky Way’s core, and can only live on T-0 planets. In Spore, planets have a “terraforming score” of T0, T1, T2, up to T3.

            A T0 is unlivable and is too hot, cold, humid, or dry, too thick or thing an atmosphere. It has no species.

            T1 or T2 is what Earth has in the game. T3 is the “perfect” world. You can terraform a planet to T3 using the Staff of Life, which you get at the Milky Way’s Core.


            So, by proxy, I’m already calling Musk’s Grok a ruination of the world.

              • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                Yes but it’s a pain without the staff of life. Also, no – Earth when you first visit it in the game, has T1, IIRC.