I call this "noticing confusion" (by way of @ESYudkowsky) and it's probably sufficient to be a singular hallmark of interesting people. The superpower comes from playing with what anomalies suggest about the explanations that fail to predict themhttps://twitter.com/paulg/status/1147505767039287296 …
But the large species that do encounter humans quite frequently (because they approach shorelines) actually have a pretty diverse diet — ex: white sharks are known to eat fish, turtles, aquatic mammals, even birds
-
-
It seems to me that the injury risk explanation would be stronger if it were true that sharks very rarely bit humans, but upon biting continued to feed unless deterred by an attack in response. But it's hard to say unless you know where the selection pressure comes from
-
It could be that bite is to get taste, shark expects a known taste. But when it tastes something unfamiliar is confused/cautious. Maybe sharks map our taste onto the closest familiar taste, i.e. marine mammals, plus large-ish size => dolphins, not safe to eat?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Maybe they have innate/hardcoded instincts for each common prey type. Humans only arrived fairly recently in most parts of the world, and human pop density was very low anyway so no time to evolve instinct to eat us. 10 million years eating turtles vs 10k for us. Big diff!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.