Nick_Tarleton comments on Boksops -- Ancient Superintelligence? - Less Wrong

-2 Post author: MBlume 30 December 2009 11:12AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (37)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: SilasBarta 30 December 2009 05:40:55PM *  5 points [-]

We've had this discussion before here: Neanderthals were, in all likelihood, smarter than Homo sapiens, had a higher average brain size, and coexisted with humans, yet still went extinct. I believe the prevailing theory is that humans were more social and reproduced faster, which outweighed the intelligence gap at the time.

For an analogy, think about the Psilons in Master of Orion 2: they're very intelligent, but are weak early in the game. Given enough time, they'll have much better technology than everyone else, but they have to live that long first.

Also, it's generally accepted that it's the brain mass ratio that matters (for some reason), not the absolute brain size. Presumably this has something to do with how a higher body mass means a higher "computational load" on the brain, so to get more intelligence, you need higher brain mass per unit body mass.

Comment author: Nick_Tarleton 30 December 2009 09:16:00PM 1 point [-]

This (other disadvantages outweighed) would be my guess as well. The facial neoteny makes me suspect some kind of global growth disruption, with harmful effects on the rest of the body.

Also, to the (probably substantial, though I haven't read much about the question) extent that intelligence in the EEA was about within-group competition, Boskop wouldn't have had an advantage over H. sapiens.