[yuvalr1]

The website took some time to load. Here is a link to the video in the article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHpu7ngQxwE&t=39s

The conclusions - humans work best by themselves and the quality decreases as the number of people increases. For ants it's the opposite. Quite interesting!

[yuvalr1]

And here is the actual paper (linked from the article as well): https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2414274121

[invalidname]

There was some nuance here. They blocked the abilities of the humans to communicate when achieving that result. So no talking or even gestures, only communicate like ants do.

Since we are so used to communicate when collaborating, it's unsurprising that we fail at collaborating when that is taken away.

This is a very cool study. But the conclusion is probably more nuanced.

[yuvalr1]

While that is true, the paper shows more video and experiments that they did. they show that a single person finishes the puzzle way faster than a group of people. I agree it could be interesting to check how a group of people, sufficiently able to collaborate, would solve the puzzle. Would that be faster than a single person?

[yamrzou]

I remember reading somehwere about the optimal size for human groups to be efficient, but I can't recall the source. If anyone has any pointers, I'd appreciate it!

[antisthenes]

Efficient at what exactly? Doing a simple task? Complex task? Living as a self-sufficient community?

There have to be different numbers for different problems.

[yamrzou]

I think it was about the group being able to communicate effectively, to decrease conflict and coordination cost.

[singleshot_]

Dunbar's Number