4 ms·

Yes, but this reductive view isn't useful. It's happening, whether we know how to do it or not. The important question is how to proceed.

• mannykannot 9y ago
  Proceeding by ignoring the inherent difficulties is certainly an option... In fact, that is how we got to the current situation.
  • sillysaurus3 9y ago
    The thing is, everyone knows it's difficult. It's not new information. The people who proceed anyway stand to benefit handsomely if they don't screw it up. So the game is simply: don't screw up. It's hard, to be sure. But to say it's impossible is to overstate the issue. And even if it is impossible, it doesn't mean it will end in disaster 100% of the time.
    • mannykannot 9y ago
      > The thing is, everyone knows it's difficult. It's not new information. Actually, a lot of people seem to be in denial over just how difficult it is, and what those difficulties are. > So the game is simply: don't screw up. If only the people who lost a combined $31M had followed this simple advice! Then everything would have been fine. > And even if it is impossible, it doesn't mean it will end in disaster 100% of the time. It does not have to end in disaster 100% of the time for people to lose faith. Losing < $1M would do it for me. This is just talking around the issue. There is a currently-unsolved problem here, and if you have a solution, it would be helpful if you were to share it.
      • deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]