Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Size of Life

    (neal.fun)
    2536 points eatonphil | 16 comments | | HN request time: 1.304s | source | bottom
    1. milancurcic ◴[] No.46220264[source]
    Neal delivers. I recently learned that viruses are not considered living being, but I'm nevertheless happy they're included here because they're both relevant and interesting in this context.
    replies(6): >>46220389 #>>46220558 #>>46220612 #>>46223744 #>>46227256 #>>46235867 #
    2. cainxinth ◴[] No.46220389[source]
    Viruses are to life as LLMs are to reasoning: they often behave like their category expects but not for the same reasons as the genuine article.
    replies(2): >>46220440 #>>46220465 #
    3. seemaze ◴[] No.46220440[source]
    ..er, a parasitic threat to life and happiness that become an endemic drag on global well being?
    replies(1): >>46228313 #
    4. paddleon ◴[] No.46220465[source]
    as a former virologist, I love the thought that LLMs are the virus of reasoning :)
    replies(1): >>46223126 #
    5. rssoconnor ◴[] No.46220558[source]
    Not that I'm qualified to reply, but I think this is debated. I seem to recall reading in "Immune" by Philipp Dettmer that there is an argument that a virus is analogous to a spore stage of life, and the virus begins "living" when it plants itself inside a cell full of "nutrients", sheds it's skin and begins consuming and replicating.
    replies(1): >>46228612 #
    6. alkyon ◴[] No.46220612[source]
    They do have genes and are subject to natural selection so to say the least they are a clear borderline case.
    7. graybeardhacker ◴[] No.46223126{3}[source]
    Once a virologist always a virologist I always say.
    8. dsego ◴[] No.46223744[source]
    I was taught in school they were something in between.
    9. dartharva ◴[] No.46227256[source]
    Hey, if they originated naturally and interact with the environment and reproduce, they are living beings. Mere human taxonomists can't just "classify" away the fact.
    replies(3): >>46227677 #>>46229218 #>>46230292 #
    10. margalabargala ◴[] No.46227677[source]
    Are crystalline structures alive?
    replies(1): >>46228463 #
    11. tock ◴[] No.46228313{3}[source]
    Every other living organism looking at human beings: yeah.
    12. LtWorf ◴[] No.46228463{3}[source]
    The one that destroyed Data's planet was, I'd say.
    13. dJLcnYfsE3 ◴[] No.46228612[source]
    It is always going to be controversial but after discovery of prions - needle shifted to "self-replicating means nothing and viruses are also dead". Then scientists also found viruses large enough that they get infected with other viruses, and parasitic cells that are missing most parts required for metabolism, so it is getting more fuzzy again.
    14. kruczek ◴[] No.46229218[source]
    You are doing the same classification. It all depends on the definition of what a living being is.
    15. 4ndr3vv ◴[] No.46230292[source]
    MRS GREN would like to have a word with you :)
    16. someNameIG ◴[] No.46235867[source]
    From what I remember from undergrad the reason they're not life is that they lack their own metabolism, they use the metabolism of host cells. And metabolism needs to be a constant thing, they don't have any when outside a cell.