wewbull
wewbull t1_j964efw wrote
Reply to comment by Shadowfalx in Why are fevers cyclical? by Key-Marionberry-9854
It's random in the short term. In the long term, beneficial traits will improve survivability and be selected for. If staying in fever benefitted surviving it's reasonable to assume it would have arisen by chance and then been selected for by now.
wewbull t1_j95tpui wrote
Reply to comment by fack_yuo in Why are fevers cyclical? by Key-Marionberry-9854
Sounds like a classical control feedback loop in engineering.
However if it was just this there'd be no reason the body wouldn't have developed some kind of hysteresis to "debounce" the system, latching the fever on for a period after the viral load drops to ensure the complete eradication of the virus.
I suspect the fever is expensive or damaging in itself. So the best system is something less drastic, but that might take longer to kill the virus.
wewbull t1_ixu6r9y wrote
Reply to comment by Karmakazee in Rotten Rodents: The 10 Worst and Weirdest Computer Mice by southbaytechguru
Oh yes. Atari ST and Amiga mice were all opto-mechanical.
Optical mice first started early 90s (with special mouse pads) for things like Sun workstations.
At least, that was my experience.
wewbull t1_ixu6i8p wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in The West is slowly rebuilding its rare earths supply chain. by BalticsFox
Shame we share a planet with them.
wewbull t1_ixu5qw0 wrote
Reply to comment by clickwir in Bye-bye airplane mode: EU allows smartphones during flights by Zhukov-74
Had a pan-european flight recently where I'd left my phone in my bag and forgot to enable flight mode.
At the end of the flight I checked my phone and had 5 or 6 "Welcome to Romania/ Hungary/ Austria/ Germany / etc." messages as my phone had registered with the various networks from 30,000 ft.
wewbull t1_j96d4tw wrote
Reply to comment by yaminokaabii in Why are fevers cyclical? by Key-Marionberry-9854
True. Local inflections like that can act as barriers to getting to a much more advantageous trait. I agree.
...but I also think it's wrong to say evolution is random. It's random experiments in a game of procreation. Those experiments which fail are discarded. As such the overall process is guided away from failure and not random.
Maybe I was asserting the positive case (towards success) too much, when the negative case (away from failure) is really the stronger aspect.