We already know that genes regulates speech - for example, FOXP2 [0] - and have successfully sequenced the human genome, and have started similar initiatives on other archaic human and primate species.
Phylogenetic Analysis has been fairly successful already in analyzing our genetic history, so I'm not sure why you'd think it's impossible.
>As a quick point and this is quite a late response, having the same FOXP2 gene may not be enough. New evidence suggests
>Using statistical software that evaluates gene expression based on the type of gene, Vanderbilt graduate student Laura Colbran found that Neandertal versions of the gene would have pumped out much less FOXP2 protein than expressed in modern brains. In living people, a rare mutation that causes members of a family to produce half the usual amount of FOXP2 protein also triggers severe speech defects, notes Simon Fisher, director of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, who discovered the gene.
I'm not an expert, but I guess they mean "complex enough language" to discard isolated words and consider only "languages" that have "sentences that may have 5 words" or some more accurate criteria.
Well, we know that they could communicate (or be attractive enough) to interbreed with Homo sapiens — presumably they weren’t the genetically stronger species because their DNA is generally 1-3% represented in ours.
We don’t know, as you note. But the genetic evidence combined with tool use and their large Supra-orbital indices (fairly big brains, if shaped differently than ours) all would make that the preferred prior I’d say.
It's not clear how much interbreeding there was. It doesn't take many introgression events over the millennia to show up in the genetic record. And, to put it delicately, it's not clear any communication was involved in these events.
When i buy 512G microsd it becomes my property. If i need to repair or replace my property, it should be disclosed what technology i bought, so that i or my repairman could understand my property enough to decide a proper path forward depending on my data & other environmental devices.
The author needed to reverse engineer what could have been on the spec sheet...
Step 1: curate a context window of code from different repos (poke team about switching to mono repo)
Step 2: write a slack style message as if you are discussing the solution with a teammate that you have authority over as a delegate to get shit done & to revise as needed.
Step 3: press enter, LLM does something you don't like, delete history, fix prompt in step 2 and ask again, rinse and repeat until you have working code.
Step 4: ask for the changes to be written as a bash file that cat EOF all the files that change into place, run the script.
Step 5: git diff & play test the changes using functional testing (use your mouse & keyboard test the code paths that changed...)
Step 6: continue prompting & deleting history as needed to refine.
I was just thinking about something like this for very small web applications (1,200 line app.py & 600 lines of html templates), something lighter than requiring a working docker install.
a handful of dependencies (mostly Pyramid based at the moment) & whatever dependencies those have, pull it all down & serve it out of a tarball or zip file of a portable virtualenv.
If the maintainers are reading this is cool. I would start with an exporter/importer for pages from Wikipedia format into whatever format you use, it should also deal with the media. This is no small task but what you need.
It's legitimately a pain to do, because most Wikipedia articles use a bunch of templates. So for anything outside the most-simple of articles you suddenly have to implement a lot of the more painful bits of wikitext. Then if you want to import them back to Wikipedia, you've got to match those things back up or you'll get reverted for messing up the page...
Plus complying with CC BY-SA requirements for the content, of course.
