this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
772 points (100.0% liked)

196

16450 readers
1780 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] huginn@feddit.it 82 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Friendly reminder that cooperation is mutually beneficial and the mathematical solution to the prisoner's dilemma is to cooperate but not be a pushover.

[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 16 points 10 months ago (3 children)

That fungus would eat the tree if it had the abiliry

[–] huginn@feddit.it 26 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Don't ascribe motivations to biological processes.

That fungus wouldn't eat the tree because it doesn't eat the tree. There are tree eating fungi but that is not one of them.

That fungus is proof of cooperation being mutually beneficial and evidence of how "altruism" works out in favor of the cooperators.

[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

There are tree eating fungi but that is not one of them.

Based on what?

According to my quick research, symbiotic fungus doesn't fruit unless the tree is in trouble. That tree seems fine, so then the fungus probably isn't good for the tree

[–] Inconcinnity@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Where on earth are you researching to come to that conclusion? Mushrooms overwhelmingly fruit based on climatic conditions. If the weather is right, they fruit. And it is well established that mycorrhizal fungi are good for the trees and other plants they have symbiotic relationships with, which is why fungal inoculation is becoming increasingly popular. It's also why they are called symbiotic, and not parasitic.

[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)
[–] Inconcinnity@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

I'd be wary of using a foraging blog as a source of information, there is a lot of misinformation that gets around in foraging communities.

In this case the information is mostly okay, with some caveats. Morels certainly don't fruit exclusively when a tree is dying (this blog doesn't quite assert that, but it does highly emphasise the dying trees part so I can see how you would take that away) and it's important to note that the trees death was caused by a separate parasitic fungi and not the morels. They're fruiting in an attempt to spread their spores before they go down with the ship, so to speak.

Personally I'm a little skeptical about the old timer stories and the conclusion drawn from them, but I live on a different continent with completely different species of fungi so I couldn't say for sure. Over here our most prolific morel seasons are always when the temperature is mild, there have been good rains and the forest is happy and healthy. From an evolutionary perspective, this makes perfect sense. The fungal spores have a much better chance of establishing new colonies when resources are plentiful. A symbiotic mushroom that only fruits when all its symbionts are dying around it is going to be naturally selected out of existence.

[–] Swallowtail@beehaw.org 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 2 points 10 months ago

I think you're right

[–] stanka@lemmy.ml 19 points 10 months ago

Don't kid yourself Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd eat you and everyone you care about.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Your dog would kill you in a heartbeat if he thought he could

Which is unfortunate, since you would also slaughter your dog if you ever realize you can

Oh gods, no.... What have I done?

[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I mean, yeah?

I'm sure if I slipped and died in the shower my cats would eat me, and I'd eat them if it was between that and starvation

[–] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

So why isn't that happening?
Are you letting a free meal loiter your hallways?

[–] PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 10 months ago

Killing the emergency rations now means they won't be fresh in an emergency!

[–] essellburns@beehaw.org 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The mathematical solution to the prisoners dilemma depends on how the variables are framed. The standard values are chosen to represent your point and so don't provide evidence of anything.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

In the sense of the values awarded for cooperation vs competition? Sure it's an approximation but that doesn't mean it's arbitrary. The entire point is to explore the nature of altruistic behavior, which we know exists. We know there are deer who groom each other even though it is in each deer's best interest to be groomed but not groom in turn. There is a larger benefit to betrayal than to cooperation but a cost associated with everyone acting selfishly.

The prisoner's dilemma is a model of reality. Sure you can insert numbers that make it work in reverse but it's as valid as saying gravity is 4m/s² proves that I won't die by jumping off this building.

[–] essellburns@beehaw.org 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

In any form it's fundamentally misleading as a model.

Even if we were to accept that the dilemma proves the value of universal cooperation, achieving that outcome would create the most fertile environment for exploitation. When everyone is trusting, that's the best time to lie.

Hence backbone.

The best strategy is cooperation... with backbone.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Your ignorance of the solution is on full display, and you should probably go look up what the solution is before you act like you know what you're talking about.

[–] essellburns@beehaw.org 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

My students will be so disappointed to learn of my ignorance when I cover that topic this year. I'll have to get your input on my lesson plans. 😏

[–] huginn@feddit.it 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] essellburns@beehaw.org 1 points 10 months ago

It's a university

[–] mossy_capivara@midwest.social 74 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] chumbalumber@lemmy.blahaj.zone 25 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

… although i don’t think mycorrhiza produces mushrooms.

[–] chumbalumber@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

What? The first picture in the article is a mycorrhizal mushroom (the fly agaric). If you mean edible fungi, then all of the members of the boletus family (which includes porcini) are mycorrhizal.

[–] aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago
[–] lowleveldata@programming.dev 22 points 10 months ago

It's called an ecosystem

[–] zxk@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

Someone get that mushroom an Ayn Rand book

[–] Bonsoir@lemmy.ca 18 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I don't see why social darwinists wouldn't like it. I mean, that fungus is thriving. Thus, it must be a really strong individual who made good decisions (associating with trees when it was advantageous).

[–] pozbo@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

Isn't survival the single biggest trade incentive though? Like, I go to work everyday so I can buy food, but not because it's so yummy in my tummy, I do it because I'll die if I don't.

[–] AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I dont understand. They share recources right? Thats what i learnt in school.

[–] FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world 39 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yea but why would they share if there's no money to be made 🤔

[–] AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 months ago
[–] 1024_Kibibytes@lemm.ee 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The continued life & growth of both plants would be the profit incentive, wouldn't it?

[–] kay@lemmings.world 18 points 10 months ago

The continued life & growth of people in a community helping each other is the exact motivation that usually makes the profit incentive useless

[–] bev@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

You can do trade only with contacts. If you don't know someone it's hard to trade.

[–] danikpapas@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago

They are actually maximizing their profit

[–] chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The libtards will say: CaPiTaLisM iS nAtUrAl

[–] i3c8XHV@aussie.zone 1 points 10 months ago

It's called symbiosis. They both profit from it.

How do I know? Because it evolved. Why did it evolve? Because it gives them an advantage.

[–] IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Fungi won’t trade if the tree is not giving enough nutrients. So while they don’t trade for profit they sure as hell aren’t engaging in charity.

[–] BluesF@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Mutual aid, in other words.

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] kay@lemmings.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No. Flat out no. There is no competition and they're literally providing what they are capable of to take care of the others' need. Mutual aid is not a marketplace and the fact you instinctually thought of it that way tells me you need a book on capitalist realism.

[–] platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There's no competition between trees? Hmm...

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Not all competition is mediated via markets. Mushrooms will compete by injecting themselves into their adversaries using their own internal pressure.