

Portrait of the Predator as an Evolutionary Dead End - Rob-Goodier
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/digital/fact-vs-fiction/portrait-of-the-predator-as-an-evolutionary-dead-end

======
ddewey
Anyone else bothered by the shallowness of this article?

Maybe Predators are not technically biological predators, but the biological
definition isn't the only use of the word (e.g. sexual predators). Using the
word "Predator" instead of "Hunter" suggests that Predators derive something
essential from their activities-- it's not a sport for them, it's a way of
life.

This article also gives too much credit to simplistic evolutionary-biological
explanations of modern cultures. Assuming that Predators were shaped by
evolutionary pressures like ours, then concluding that they are "failing as a
species" because they are "acting against Darwinian pressures", is
intellectually lazy.

This whole thing reminds me of the kind of pseduo-intellectual justifications
historically given for slavery. They are part of a "backward" culture in some
ill-defined way.

Whew, maybe this is an over-serious reply to this article, but I prefer to
practice critical thinking when I can, especially when it comes to portraying
other cultures or species (fictional or non) as backward.

~~~
hugh3
Yes. It could have been much better.

Now, I think it's interesting to speculate how the Predators might have
evolved (unlike the Aliens, whose life cycle appears to be just plain nutty).
The two things we do know about them are that they're technologically advanced
_and_ have an extreme interest in hunting. They also look like biological
predators, with their sharp teeth. So I'm guessing that they're a bit like
what would happen if a pure carnivore, rather than an omnivore, had developed
brains as big as ours.

I see nothing wrong with the idea that a species could have evolved to enjoy
extremely dangerous forms of hunting if that helped with sexual selection.
Much like peahens find males who carry around enormous handicapping tails to
be attractive, female Predators may be attracted to males who hunt
ridiculously dangerous game at great cost to themselves.

I'm not sure about the binocular vision thing: don't Predators have binocular
vision? Pictures on wikipedia make it look like they have two eyes.

What I think we _can_ say is that Predators would be crappy predators if it
weren't for their technology, but they might have been sufficiently good to
get away with it in whatever conditions they evolved in. Crocodiles are pretty
crappy predators too, but they seem to get away with their tiny niche quite
nicely.

~~~
ddewey
Another way their evolution could have affected them is if their reproduction
strategy was different than ours. If they had extremely large numbers of
offspring (instead of the few we humans have), they might not emphasize
individual survival as strongly as we do, and might value competition and
risk-taking so as to keep only the fittest children.

I don't know how seriously I can take this kind of speculation, though.
Unfortunately, we only have one data point to work with when it comes to
technologically advanced species.

For more on how different other intelligences could be from us, here's some
entertaining sci-fi: <http://lesswrong.com/lw/y4/three_worlds_collide_08/>
Previous posting: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1387771>

~~~
hugh3
Hmm, there's a question: are there any predators on Earth which use the "large
numbers of offspring" strategy? Seems to be more common among prey animals
than predators.

This kinda makes sense. For a rabbit or fly, food is plentiful and the biggest
threat to your survival is predators, so it makes sense to have loads of
offspring in the hope that some will survive. For a lion, predators are
nonexistent but the biggest threat to survival is lack of food, so if you have
too many children in the same territory you run the risk that they'll all
starve.

Exception that "proves" the rule: frogs are incredibly fecund predators, but
tadpoles are herbivores.

Hmm, I guess I'm forgetting spiders.

------
bitwize
Huh.

I've always thought of the Predator series as being based off _The Most
Dangerous Game_ : i.e., these guys had become such ruthless and efficient
killers that going after their normal prey just wasn't fun anymore, and they
had to get their kicks by hunting sapients like us.

