agmand
Joined 4 years ago
Joined 4 years ago
Remote:Yes
Willing to relocate: Yes
Technologies: Python/R, Bash, Pyspark, AWS cloud, PostgreSQL, several bioinformatics tools & applied statistics
Résumé/CV: https://linkedin.com/in/andirko
Email: [email protected]
About me: I'm a human Genomics PhD (U. of Barcelona, expertise in brain evolution) with some industry experience as a Big Data dev (~1.5 years). Experienced communicator used to dealing with unsolved problems. Just for a taste of what kind of person I am: I originally got a BA is in Linguistics, but my PhD is in a totally different field. I ended with 7 scientific publications and a hundred plus citations (which, I'd say, it's a fairly good outcome). Email me and I'll tell you all about how that happened!
My ideal positions would involve one of the following professional interests: data science, bioinformatics, anything science (science communication, science-adjacent technical positions or others), AI. The following topics all but guarantee a yes for me: health/life sciences, open source, music industry, climate change, social issues. If your position doesn't fit these categories, don't hesitate to reach out anyway. I'm always open to an informal chat anytime. Looking forward to connecting with you!
Strong differences: it's not so clear these are "strong", for a couple reasons: 1. The archaeological record has disputed some of those claims: spears are supposed to have been part of the hunting repertoire of Neanderthals [1], there are some claims regarding musical instruments (personally I'm skeptical) [3], and cave paintings [2] basically resemble what sapiens where doing about that time, which is just... not very impressive in general.
2- A much more interesting question is hiding in plain sight. It's not as much "did Neanderthals do X or Y relative to what sapiens are known to be capable of?", but rather: "given enough time, could Neanderthals or Denisovans have painted something like the Lascaux cave paintings?". Or, rather: did all these extinct humans species have the same capability for cultural ratcheting, ie transmitting and refining knowledge, that we have proven to have? Sapiens needed a lot of time to create some of our most representative "representative art", let alone other cultural innovations. On the other hand, if there were any differences in capability, what were their nature? What are the implications for language?
Re the basis: for sure! Some of the innate physical and neurological basis for language have been in place for a long time. Which pieces where co-opted, modified or appeared de novo when and for what is the interesting part. Having only the archaeological record and the DNA of these species, it's a hell of a problem.
As for the shrinking brain size: as far as I know there is some doubt about the universality or significance of this claim. It could be due to agricultural diet changes, or holocene climate fluctuations. It also coincides with population size increases, so mutations allowing more efficient brains or just regular old drift are possible. Honestly, I can't say I have a strong opinion on it.
[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-37904-w
Source: human evolution PhD, I have worked in faculty of language evolution, prosociality, genetic basis for self-domestication.
As someone who has trouble with drum patterns as well I really liked the idea.
[0] https://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2023/building-the-amen-break/
[1] https://andirko.eu/wiki/bookmarks
(Edit: typo)