[HN Gopher] Can we talk to whales? ___________________________________________________________________ Can we talk to whales? Author : fortran77 Score : 81 points Date : 2023-09-04 16:37 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.newyorker.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.newyorker.com) | Traubenfuchs wrote: | I wish we could talk to orcas and explain to them at which level | of overkill we could retaliate and exterminate them if they don't | stop attacking our boats. | RetroTechie wrote: | If I would ever find myself in that situation (chance is slim | but has increased to non-zero for me), I'd be tempted to pull | out a skippy ball & see if they're up for a game of water polo. | KaiserPro wrote: | Well, if you spend enough time on duo lingo, and get past the "I | fucking love the rrrrugby" stage, then you can totally talk to | all sorts of people from whales in their native language. | [deleted] | tzs wrote: | Suppose some villain had an eventual need to be able to | understand whales (or dolphins) communications, but has several | years solve the problem. I'm talking about the kind of villain | who does not care if what and how they do this is ethical so all | that matters to them is whether or not it works. | | Think someone like the High Evolutionary as portrayed in the | third Guardians of the Galaxy movie, but limited to present day | Earth technology and knowledge. | | Suppose that villain took several human babies, gave them hearing | aids or cochlear implants that pitch shift and compress | whale/dolphin sounds down to where humans can hear them, and | raised them in a mixed human/whale environment so that from their | first weeks they were seeing whales and hearing while speech as | much they were seeing humans and hearing human speech. | | Would some of those human babies end up learning to understand | whale the same way babies raised in bilingual extended families | often end up learning both languages? | dools wrote: | Social interaction plays a major role in language development. | If you take away the reinforcement of everyone being really | excited when the baby goes "da-da" instead of "gur-gur" you | would lose the learning. It's also much more difficult for | blind babies to learn to speak because they can't see the mouth | shapes being made by their parents which is a deliberate | training exercise. I don't think they'd learn to speak whale | any more than kids learn to speak other sounds in their natural | environment. IANAL (Linguist), IANAB. | seszett wrote: | > _I don 't think they'd learn to speak whale any more than | kids learn to speak other sounds in their natural | environment._ | | I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work either, but kids do learn | the sounds of other animals and they love to reproduce them. | Many kids can make dog or duck sounds before they can even | speak like humans. | | The problem is that of course, dogs, cats, ducks don't | actually have a language, just a few different sounds, so | that doesn't prove anything about kids' ability to understand | a hypothetical actual animal language. | cogman10 wrote: | My question, why focus on "can we talk with whales" when we | already have the problem of "can we talk with humans" that has a | known right answer? | | We can have a spanish speaker (or speakers) sit down, feed us | with hours and hours of content (heck, that's already there) and | then work with AI to try and create a black box interpreter that | can turn spanish to english. | | Has anyone done this? If the goal is universal translator why not | start off with a simple case? | | My worry with trying to do this first with whales or other | animals is we don't know the answer. Nobody can look at the whale | AI translation and say "You know what, this was a good | translation". Sort of the "Mars attacks" problem. | | All this said, I do recognize that this creates a "human bias". | The way humans talk may not readily translate to animal speech | (But perhaps it would for other simians?). | ben_w wrote: | > Has anyone done this? | | Kinda. As I recall this happened by accident with French in | (GPT-2? Not confident which LLM) -- even though it wasn't meant | to be in the training set, there were phrases just lifted | directly from the other language. | | "Hasta la vista" et cetera have a certain _je ne sais quoi_ , | but I suggest a better _Gedankenexperiment_ would be the | language of the people of the North Sentinel Island -- with | whom you cannot interact by both law and them being homicidally | xenophobic, and will therefore be limited to remote sensing | with parabolic or laser microphones only. | cogman10 wrote: | Ideally, you'd use a language with native speakers who can | ultimately verify the translation efforts. Perhaps a language | like Icelandic, Celtic, or Korean would be better. Languages | with little cross over into english while also having | accessible translators. | | North Sentinel island would be a good stress test, but not a | good first step as we can't ask them if we got the language | right. | [deleted] | pawelwentpawel wrote: | I wonder how much animal body language could help with that. | Maybe instead of trying to focus purely on the language (like | with human language translation), the algorithm could try to | observe and infer the meaning from more than just audio? Dogs | were domesticated long ago and can communicate with humans, | sometimes purely through "facial" expressions and body | movement. | cogman10 wrote: | I'd think it would depend a lot on the animal. Whales, for | example, don't really have great eyesight. They depend a lot | more on sound and have been observed communicating over long | ranges (particularly because water carries sound quiet well). | So it seems natural to conclude that whales would communicate | more primarily through sound than other mechanisms. | pawelwentpawel wrote: | That's a great point, didn't think about that! | ethanbond wrote: | I'm pretty sure there are dozens of startups doing AI-based | translation, including just general LLMs which seem to be | extremely good at this already. | vasco wrote: | Those are trained differently, being exposed to translations | in the training. My understanding of the person you are | replying to is proposing "discovering the meaning" of Spanish | by just using audio without any translations in the training. | Pretending we don't know Spanish as if it were an | animal/alien language. | ethanbond wrote: | Ah I see now! Thanks for the clarification. | cogman10 wrote: | They are solving a different problem. They are doing the | "white box" translation, that is knowing good inputs and | outputs. | | I'm talking about something more akin to what these | researchers are doing. Without feeding the AI information | about the correct translation, can we make an AI that can | translate spanish to english? That is, what the researchers | are trying to do with this whale translation. | ethanbond wrote: | I see now! Interesting idea. Thanks for clarifying :) | og_kalu wrote: | You don't need Parallel corpora for all language pairs in a | "predict the next token" LLM. | | What I'm saying is that if an LLM is trained on English, | French and Spanish and there is Eng to French data, you | don't need Eng to Spa data to get Eng to Spa translations. | cogman10 wrote: | Spanish may have been a bad first language, but others | like Korean, Icelandic, or even Russian would work as | there is very little cross over or related languages. | | You'd have to be careful with the input data, though, as | it would be easy to corrupt your dataset with | translations if you try and do this fast. | theptip wrote: | But the problem is not a black box. Presumably at least some | (likely most) of whale conversation is things like "I see some | fish to our left" where you can measure a result, ie does the | pod go left. (Some whales perform highly complex coordinated | hunting strategies, which you'd think includes some verbal | coordination.) | | Or at least, you shoot for that and maybe discover that 99% is | philosophizing you can't understand. But maybe you can | bootstrap from present tense to suggest they are reminiscing | about previous fish seasons. And so on. | cogman10 wrote: | Perhaps, though I could see there being issues like "I see | fish on our left" "well, you're always wrong so we are going | right" being an issue. There's even the issue with | "shorthand" that might not be universalizable. For example, | with a hunting strategy you could imagine "Execute the | Janeway protocol" being an issue for translation. | | You can see some of the hunting strategy problems play out | with sheep dogs. A well trained sheep herding dog can execute | really impressive actions based only on specific whistles | trained by the handler. [1]. It'd be wrong to conclude a | specific element of language for all dogs based on the | whistles. | | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YKAOMqZENo | ramblenode wrote: | > Perhaps, though I could see there being issues like "I | see fish on our left" "well, you're always wrong so we are | going right" being an issue. | | This isn't a black box because the whalesong encodes some | type of behavior that we could, in theory, observe and | decode even if we didn't understand the atomic pieces of | the whalesong. It's how you study any unknown language--you | learn a few relations and then gradually build up a richer | lexicon and grammar that gives finer-grained understanding. | | I'm not sure what the dog whistle example is intended to | demonstrate, as even human language has a significant | learned component. | 3pt14159 wrote: | The problem with this type of thinking is that it undervalues | the role that non-vital communication has in social species. | Look at uncontacted peoples around the world. They've had | music and dance even though their tribes consisted of a | couple hundred people. These forms of communication serve a | role in their communities but it isn't "there are fish in the | pond over there" it's more special and abstract. | | If we are to treat whalesong the same way then we can't | immediately assume that they're just trying to communicate | base concepts. | ramblenode wrote: | In any given human language, at least, most vocabulary | tends to be concrete objects or physical processes. The | parent is suggesting that we begin by looking for that | subset of the language by correlating the speech sounds of | whales with their behavior to objects in their environment. | blaze33 wrote: | I once read that whale's songs could be used to transmit a 3d | image from one whale to another which doesn't sound so crazy | considering that echolocation can activate the visual cortex. | | I don't remember the article and anyway there wasn't much more | detail but I always found this idea quite interesting. Could be | that looking for words, sentences or grammar in a whale's song is | a misguided and anthropocentric approach to the problem. They may | instead have a visual language that just so happen to be | transmitted by sound. | | Like, do you see what I mean? But, literally. | pyinstallwoes wrote: | Cymatics is very interesting. | mjan22640 wrote: | The shrew like common mammalian ancestor was a night animal and | could echolocate. The 3d perception could have been the driving | force behind the evolution of the large brain. | Figs wrote: | I remember commenting on an article related to that here so I | went digging through my comment history and found this post | about dolphin visual language: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3314056 | | Given that that was all the way back in 2011 and didn't lead to | any big world changing events I assume it was just cranks being | cranky and a lot of people getting their hopes up. | dinkleberg wrote: | That is a fascinating idea. We do have a tendency | (understandably) to try and understand the universe through our | own lens. Our thinking is heavily tied to our sensory input, so | it is challenging to imagine what having echolocation or | magnetic senses might be like. | | But there is no reason we should expect other species to | communicate and think in the same way we do. | engineer_22 wrote: | That's fascinating! | | In the thread of this thought, to search for intelligent life | off-planet sort of misses the point, doesn't it? Here we have | an intelligent species with a common ancestor, which we may | assume to be easier to communicate with than an extra- | terrestrial being. And we have hardly begun to attempt to | communicate with our earthly neighbor in a meaningful way, but | we have projects probing the cosmos for signals from space. | xg15 wrote: | Followup question, do we _want_ to talk to whales, given what we | 're currently doing to the oceans? | wizofaus wrote: | Controversially my suspicion is what we're doing to the oceans | and the rest of the planet will cause more suffering to humans | than any other species, which will mostly just die out without | really understanding what's happening to them. We all know what | human suffering feels like, and we're all able to communicate | with other humans one way or another, yet none of us seem able | to accept we might have to change our lifestyles or reevaluate | our priorities to help minimise that suffering in others. | Still, I'd be fascinated whether whales actually had any | interesting (and comprehensible!) thoughts to share about human | behaviour, and whether we might learn at least something from | them. | RetroTechie wrote: | Yes, certainly! | | It's those OTHER people doing bad things to animals & their | environment, not you. Right? (wink wink) | | Most whales would probably fall for that (or give you benefit | of the doubt).. many humans do. | [deleted] | ketanmaheshwari wrote: | Yes. We want some good scolding from whales. | thereisnojesus wrote: | No you scold the whales. More of a sear actually | LegitShady wrote: | There is no we. Both are different groups of people. And also | yes, they're almost unrelated. | xg15 wrote: | Feel free to explain that to the whales. | qprofyeh wrote: | Can we talk to any animals using LLM translation? | NERD_ALERT wrote: | What does that mean? | quonn wrote: | No? I mean it seems like a stretch. Where would the LLM learn | the initial English-to-Moo mapping for cows? | | Maybe if we would have a mapping we could use that to train an | LLM. | | In the meantime you can try asking ChatGPT if a cow has buddha | nature and ask for a one word reply. It have an idea what it | might say. | gizajob wrote: | "Yes" | og_kalu wrote: | You don't need Parallel corpora for all language pairs in a | "predict the next token" LLM. What I'm saying is that if an | LLM is trained on English, French and Spanish and there is | Eng to French data, you don't need Eng to Spa data to get Eng | to Spa translations. | lgas wrote: | Very nearly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tUXbbbMhvk | [deleted] | alexpotato wrote: | In the 1990s show seaQuest DSV, there was a "talking" dolphin | that spoke to the humans via a computer interface that the boy | genius character had created. | | In one of the episodes, the ship's computers get wipe so the boy | has to rebuild the dictionary of the translation system by | showing the dolphin flash cards. | | I remember thinking that was an interesting way to build a | translation layer between two different species with a BIG | assumption that the dolphin could understand the symbols on the | flashcards. | | The internet, being what it is, even has a Wikia link about this: | https://seaquest-dsv.fandom.com/wiki/Vocorder | dharmab wrote: | Spoiler for Project Hail Mary | | A large part of the book is the human crew figuring out how to | communicate with blind aliens who communicate with a sort of | musical chirping. The humans eventually write a program to | input English vocabulary and play a rudimentary form of the | music. | greesil wrote: | Bridger! | plusfour wrote: | Do whales forgive? | | The Memory Palace has done a moving episode on sperm whales. | | https://thememorypalace.us/keyhole/ | | If you're not familiar with the podcast, the episodes are | incredibly well written and narrated humanity-focused vignettes. | mnd999 wrote: | Start with laboratory mice, and then move on to dolphins I | reckon. | jonathanoliver wrote: | Why would you start with the two-smartest species on the | planet? [1] | | [1] | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_th... | robwwilliams wrote: | Brainiest by brain/body ratio: | | Mice 0.5/25 g Human 1.3/70 kg Sperm whale. 8.0/60000 kg | | We humans get to chose the allometric coefficient that makes | us seem "smartest" but D Adams knew the truth ;-) | twoWhlsGud wrote: | Crazy but intriguing stuff. Surprising (to me) thing to note - | the first goal is to be able to construct "sentences" in Sperm | Whalish not necessarily understand them. The next step is to | figure out what they mean. | bookofjoe wrote: | >If a lion could speak, we could not understand him. | | --Ludwig Wittgenstein, 'Philosophical Investigations' (1953) | calderknight wrote: | If a lion could speak, we could understand him. | p1mrx wrote: | Oh no, I don't know what to believe anymore. | [deleted] | scythe wrote: | In context, W is talking about how we infer internal states | based on external speech. So when he says "we could not | understand him", he isn't saying that we couldn't understand a | lion saying "the book is on the table" but rather that we could | not infer what is going on "inside the lion's head". | | >"I cannot know what is going on in him" is above all a | picture. It is the convincing expression of a conviction. It | does not give the reasons for the conviction. They are not | readily accessible. | | >If a lion could talk, we could not understand him. | | >It is possible to imagine a guessing of intentions like the | guessing of thoughts, but also a guessing of what someone is | actually going to do. To say "He alone can know what he | intends" is nonsense: to say "He alone can know what he will | do", wrong. For the prediction contained in my expression of | intention (for example "When it strikes five I am going home") | need not come true, and someone else may know what will really | happen. | WesSouza wrote: | Is the answer yes or no? | dools wrote: | [flagged] | lucb1e wrote: | Similar to asking whether we can do nuclear fusion: probably | yes, you just have to tell me how. So basically no(t yet). | | Also, are you sure you don't read the article? It contains lots | of vital information that we all came here to read, such as | | > Gero, who is forty-three, is tall and broad, with an eager | smile and a pronounced Canadian accent | | (Nothing against Gero, this just happened to be the part my | scroll wheel broke) | beardyw wrote: | Well, we can recognise danger calls in birds, usually repeated | sharp "chip" sounds. Going beyond that we start assuming that | some organised signals correspond to our ideas of communication. | I tend to doubt it. If there is something more complex it may be | very different to what we are used to. | [deleted] | gizajob wrote: | "If a lion could speak, we could not understand him" - | Wittgenstein | [deleted] | nelsontodd wrote: | [dead] ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-09-04 23:00 UTC)