7 ms·

I'm emotionally putting it under "amazing studies whose implications will likely never be realized", but I digress: this is literally awesome.

esturk 11y ago
Never is a long time. Maybe we won't benefit, but our children may.
- melling 11y ago
  Yes, people are extremely shortsighted. Imagine the world 50, 100, and 200 years ago. the microprocessor didn't exist 50 years ago. Most households still had black&white tv's. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/06/12/television-hdtv-digital-analog-color/2414763/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/06/12/tele... We have twice the population now. If we could get more people working on real problems...
  - malloryerik 11y ago
    "If we could get more people working on real problems..." That's a political economic, and social problem. I wonder if a basic income couldn't help here. Of course "free" education also, if it could keep high standards of quality.
    - stretchwithme 11y ago
      Basic income will only create more basic couch potatoes. We are not strengthened by having things handed to us, but by challenges. Of course, there is nothing stopping proponents of basic income from proving me wrong with their own private experiment. I'm sure it would get a lot of volunteers, at least for one half of the equation.
      - vog 11y ago
        > We are not strengthened by having things handed to us, but by challenges. Who is "we"? People in wealthy families? This analysis seems to ignore a large part of the population, even within first-world countries. Poor people have more than enough "challenges". Well, those aren't really "challenges", these are burdens that keep them down and unhealthy. Those people will not be strengthened by more of those "challenges". But they would be strengthened if they received a stable income (through whatever measure, basic income is just one possibiliy). Having to count every cent, worring about the next day rather than the next year ... this all is a huge sink of brain power, and a motivation killer as well. Increasing those people's lives to "couch potatoes" would be a huge step forward, because only then they will have the time and energy to become bored, and then to engage in creative activities, volunteering, problem solving, etc. If you give them just callenges without freeing them from their huge daily burdens, nothing will happen.
        stretchwithme 11y ago
        Having to work for everything you have is not a burden. It is perfectly natural for nearly all of humanity throughout the ages. I personally grew up poor and while it would have been nice to not have struggled for things many people take for granted, I probably feel a greater sense of accomplishment than many. I did count every cent. I worked two jobs before I finally went back to school. My motivation wasn't killed. But I doubt that would have been the case if that effort wasn't going to improve my situation in the slightest. Of course, I also didn't believe I was entitled to what other people produce, simply for being alive.
      - adrianN 11y ago
        I'd probably do more useful things if I didn't have to work. The work I do currently doesn't really benefit anyone, except my employer.
      - JulianMorrison 11y ago
        I'm sorry, I'm going to discount your comment due to the fact that HN access was handed to you and not won in single gladiatorial combat.
  - marincounty 11y ago
    I think we have too many people working on the wrong problem. Personally, while I like the silicon chip, there were more jobs 50 years ago. I was still a gleam in my father's eye, but in the 70's, their were a lot of jobs. Not working was a choice. Bad jobs were a choice. I'm not completely blaming the microprocessor. As to B & W t.v., I've always liked it. Don't know why, but just like it. Would watching The Twilight Zone be better in color? I'm partially color blind.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  I'm 33. I'm confident I'll be able to live long enough to benefit, if only because I'm willing to try something experimental. "Go big or go home" as it were. What's my other choice? Death? Nothing but upside.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - purplerabbit 11y ago
    I'd try it too! ...if I could get my hands on some of this stuff :) For some reason, I feel like that might be a little difficult.
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      My first step was having my genome sequenced. Next step is talking to someone who'll do CRISPR in vivo. I am, of course, going to wait a few years between the two :)
      - dave_sullivan 11y ago
        Ah, and so the old cyberpunk trope of underground gene modification clinics becomes reality...
        deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
  - balls187 11y ago
    As someone who is a few years older than 33, I am also hoping I live long enough to realize this :)
  - ISL 11y ago
    The alternative for many choices in life can be worse than death. A new drug that harms your nervous system or starts an auto-immune disorder could be a real bummer.

esturk 11y ago

Never is a long time. Maybe we won't benefit, but our children may.

melling 11y ago
Yes, people are extremely shortsighted. Imagine the world 50, 100, and 200 years ago. the microprocessor didn't exist 50 years ago. Most households still had black&white tv's. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/06/12/television-hdtv-digital-analog-color/2414763/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/06/12/tele... We have twice the population now. If we could get more people working on real problems...
- malloryerik 11y ago
  "If we could get more people working on real problems..." That's a political economic, and social problem. I wonder if a basic income couldn't help here. Of course "free" education also, if it could keep high standards of quality.
  - stretchwithme 11y ago
    Basic income will only create more basic couch potatoes. We are not strengthened by having things handed to us, but by challenges. Of course, there is nothing stopping proponents of basic income from proving me wrong with their own private experiment. I'm sure it would get a lot of volunteers, at least for one half of the equation.
    - vog 11y ago
      > We are not strengthened by having things handed to us, but by challenges. Who is "we"? People in wealthy families? This analysis seems to ignore a large part of the population, even within first-world countries. Poor people have more than enough "challenges". Well, those aren't really "challenges", these are burdens that keep them down and unhealthy. Those people will not be strengthened by more of those "challenges". But they would be strengthened if they received a stable income (through whatever measure, basic income is just one possibiliy). Having to count every cent, worring about the next day rather than the next year ... this all is a huge sink of brain power, and a motivation killer as well. Increasing those people's lives to "couch potatoes" would be a huge step forward, because only then they will have the time and energy to become bored, and then to engage in creative activities, volunteering, problem solving, etc. If you give them just callenges without freeing them from their huge daily burdens, nothing will happen.
      - stretchwithme 11y ago
        Having to work for everything you have is not a burden. It is perfectly natural for nearly all of humanity throughout the ages. I personally grew up poor and while it would have been nice to not have struggled for things many people take for granted, I probably feel a greater sense of accomplishment than many. I did count every cent. I worked two jobs before I finally went back to school. My motivation wasn't killed. But I doubt that would have been the case if that effort wasn't going to improve my situation in the slightest. Of course, I also didn't believe I was entitled to what other people produce, simply for being alive.
    - adrianN 11y ago
      I'd probably do more useful things if I didn't have to work. The work I do currently doesn't really benefit anyone, except my employer.
    - JulianMorrison 11y ago
      I'm sorry, I'm going to discount your comment due to the fact that HN access was handed to you and not won in single gladiatorial combat.
- marincounty 11y ago
  I think we have too many people working on the wrong problem. Personally, while I like the silicon chip, there were more jobs 50 years ago. I was still a gleam in my father's eye, but in the 70's, their were a lot of jobs. Not working was a choice. Bad jobs were a choice. I'm not completely blaming the microprocessor. As to B & W t.v., I've always liked it. Don't know why, but just like it. Would watching The Twilight Zone be better in color? I'm partially color blind.
toomuchtodo 11y ago
I'm 33. I'm confident I'll be able to live long enough to benefit, if only because I'm willing to try something experimental. "Go big or go home" as it were. What's my other choice? Death? Nothing but upside.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- purplerabbit 11y ago
  I'd try it too! ...if I could get my hands on some of this stuff :) For some reason, I feel like that might be a little difficult.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    My first step was having my genome sequenced. Next step is talking to someone who'll do CRISPR in vivo. I am, of course, going to wait a few years between the two :)
    - dave_sullivan 11y ago
      Ah, and so the old cyberpunk trope of underground gene modification clinics becomes reality...
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
- balls187 11y ago
  As someone who is a few years older than 33, I am also hoping I live long enough to realize this :)
- ISL 11y ago
  The alternative for many choices in life can be worse than death. A new drug that harms your nervous system or starts an auto-immune disorder could be a real bummer.