Rafts of ants and investment banks in distress stay afloat by "banking" on their young

Ant colonies and banks "employ" their young to improve survival chances
George ILIEV

1. Ants build floating rafts using their eggs in the foundation:
When threatened by flooding, ants build floating rafts using their own bodies and put their eggs in the foundation of the raft to increase the buoyancy of the structure. This does not damage the chances of survival of the unhatched ants in the eggs.

2. Investment banks retain the most junior people in mass redundancies:
The youngest recruits are the cheapest employees, which justifies the investment banking practice of retaining these people when cost-cutting requires mass redundancies. It is rare that the new recruits would be let go before the higher-earning mid-ranking employees.

3. Next generation often serves the present generation:
The young exist for reasons beyond merely as a vehicle to pass on your genes (or corporate culture) to future generations. In the two cases above, the young are employed to increase the chances of survival of the present generation... which isn't too different from the traditional family model where children would work on the family farm from a very young age. The ants just take it to a new level of utilitarianism - using the generation that hasn't hatched yet.

Photo: Ants (Source: Wikipedia)

(Blogging style guide: Here)

Human memory does not prioritise retaining positive experiences. Customer feedback sites: beware!

Humans remember and recognise less attractive faces better. What about a great shopping experience?
George ILIEV

Psychologists used to assume that attractive faces are remembered better and recognised more easily. It turns out they were wrong. Scientists in Jena, Germany, recently proved with experiments on test subjects that we remember unattractive faces better than attractive ones. (Read the details here.) Humans do prefer to look at a beautiful face longer, but the emotional influence actually reduces the precision of recognising this face later on.

Attractive faces also lead observers into another trap: false positives in recollection. We are more likely to think that we recognise an attractive face, even if we have never seen this face before.

All this makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. A positive experience for an animal can be finding abundant food or meeting a receptive sexual partner, while a negative experience can be dying at the claws of a predator. The positive experience can be enjoyed but only up to the point of satiation, after which life continues as normal. Whereas the negative experience may lead to a terminal outcome. Since the negative experience shapes to a bigger extent the survival chances of the animal, one would expect that evolution will remove from the gene pool those animals which do not prioritise avoiding unpleasant experiences. Thus remembering positive experiences "takes the back seat".

In a figurative way this principle applies to collecting customer feedback. Internet forums are full of irate customers who share at length their negative experience with a product or service, while much fewer stories are shared about a positive experience. It might be because customers don't remember the positive experiences as well as the negative ones. Or it might be a typically human example of selfless cooperation where irate customers try to alert fellow customers. Yet the parallel exists: a positive shopping experience can rarely be as indelibly printed in our mind as a negative experience would be. Just think of the feedback you would leave about a restaurant that gave you food poisoning.

Photo: Gisele Bundchen (Source: Wikipedia)

Photo: Sean O'Pry (Source: Wikipedia)

Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow" seen through the eyes of mantis shrimps and humans

Mantis shrimp's vision of only 12 basic colours allows it to act fast. Humans see complex colours - conducive to more deliberative decisions.
George ILIEV

As scientific trivia go, it is well known that the mantis shrimp has 12 receptors for colour in its eyes (including several in the ultraviolet spectrum), while humans and honey bees only have three and dogs have two. I used to envy this 30-cm crustacean for the myriad of colour combinations that it could potentially see. However, recent research published in the journal Science shows that the shrimp cannot see myriads of colours. Not even a hundred colours. All it can see is 12 colours, while all the variations between the 12 colours are lost on it.

Managers and CEOs are sometimes accused of being two-dimensional: of seeing things as black and white. That's an overstatement. However, even seeing in 12 finite ways would be a gross oversimplification of the world around us.

Why does the shrimp need 12 receptors? They probably evolved as a shortcut giving the shrimp a speed advantage. It is a lightning-fast predator, so by sacrificing accurate colour definition, it gained a quick way of detecting basic colours and creating a simplified image of the world. Using direct chemical/neural signals from the receptors is faster than adding the extra stage of brain simulation - as the human brain does e.g. when simulating the perception of purple from mixing red and blue. Thus the shrimp can rapidly detect prey or other predators in the coral reefs while saving the little brainpower that it has.

Shrimp vision versus human vision is exactly the same dichotomy as laid out by Nobel Prize-winning economist Daniel Kahneman in "Thinking, Fast and Slow". The shrimp deploys a fast and instinctive system while humans resort to slower and more deliberative brain simulations, which capture the world in its complexity. The lesson from all this: if it is not about shattering crab shells, better spend some time poring over your important decisions.

Photo: Mantis shrimp (Source: Wikipedia)