The author doesn't understand evolution, parasites, or smart phones.
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2025
4 points (60.0% liked)
Technology
122 readers
66 users here now
Share interesting Technology news and links.
Rules:
- No paywalled sites at all.
- News articles has to be recent, not older than 2 weeks (14 days).
- No videos.
- Post only direct links.
To encourage more original sources and keep this space commercial free as much as I could, the following websites are Blacklisted:
- NBC.
- CNBC.
- NY Magazine.
- Substack.
- Tom's Hardware.
- ZDNet.
- TechSpot.
- Ars Technica.
- The Verge.
- Engadget.
- TechCrunch.
- Gizmodo.
Encouraged:
- Archive links in the body of the post.
- Linking to the direct source, instead of linking to an article talking about the source.
founded 3 weeks ago
MODERATORS
care to expand?
Evolution doesn't have anything to say about parasites. It's simply outside its definition (though an actual biologist is free to correct me on that thought). It's not "evolutionary biologists" that define the definition of parasite they're using, it's just the basic definition of parasite.
Parasites are defined as an organism which obtains its nutrients from a host among other things, which cell phones can't be because they aren't organisms.
If you were being metaphorical as everyone has a right to be you wouldn't tack on the "evolutionarily" and specifically frame the definition under actual biological terms.
Cell phones also offer benefits for the relationship so it's not parasitical, it's symbiotic. Symbiotic relationships may be more or less mutually beneficial. They talk about this in the article, of course, but they can't undig the hole they already dug.
Therefore the author does not understand evolution, parasites, or cell phones and just wanted to slap in some buzzwords to get clicks on their article that says phones are bad.
A quick google search https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1000524 "As a group, parasites are extraordinarily diverse ... Underlying this diversity is evolution."
I understand the definition of organism is notoriously problematic. Under the definition given in schools, fire is an organism.
I'm not stating a viewpoint (I'm not qualified), but I think it's much more complex than this.
I understand the definition of organism is notoriously problematic. Under the definition given in schools, fire is an organism.
What the hell did your school define it as that is different from a traditional dictionary? 🤨
Organism: an individual animal, plant, or single-celled life form.
maybe it was life, not organism (is there a difference?): the seven characteristics https://assets.cambridge.org/97805216/80547/excerpt/9780521680547_excerpt.pdf
It's not.
Your school sucked.
You just did.
alright alright, no need to get uppity
Nonsense.
hey, i'm a proud parasite host, I have 2 folding rigs, a desktop, and a game server I serve as a host for, as well as a couple of laptops, a phone, and a tablet, hell my job is to tend to work parasites so that others can experiment on them to make new parasites!
More parasite-like parasites are coming in the near future.