3 ms·
> A better way to say the same thing is "Easy problems get solved first". This is a fallacy and undecidable. We can't evaluate the "hardness" of the problem or
by duaneb 11y ago
> A better way to say the same thing is "Easy problems get solved first".
This is a fallacy and undecidable. We can't evaluate the "hardness" of the problem or it would be solved already. Polio was WORTH CURING. It's not entirely clear fusion isn't just a pipe dream when we already are investing (and getting great returns) on renewable energy. Is it worth it? It's impossible to say (hello Hume), but we should at least be attempting to put timelines on solid goals to evaluate how shitty we are at guessing how much we should invest for what we understand.
- pixl97 11y ago>. We can't evaluate the "hardness" of the problem Yes we can. Cure polio, attempt to follow the the same steps to cure HIV, if it doesn't work it is a harder problem. It is easy to determine the minimum hardness of a problem by attempting the solutions we already know. What you are confusing is the maximum potential hardness of a problem.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- idlewords 11y agoWe can vaccinate people against polio, but not against HIV. We can effectively treat AIDS, but not polio. So which is the harder problem?