4 ms·

The study's budget was only $1m. Seems like the readership of HN could easily pull that money together and donate the funding, if the researchers could accept i

by nroach 9y ago

The study's budget was only $1m. Seems like the readership of HN could easily pull that money together and donate the funding, if the researchers could accept it.

kodfodrasz 9y ago
I'd be surprised if this "community" could gather money for anything remotely useful. Also: I'd like to see the outcome of a fundraising, and the demographics of the donators, to see how many pledge outside of CA, and outside of the USA. This would give me an impression about the extent of the Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. (imho nothing changes, things proceed with trump as before. business as usual) Just to make it clear: I'd not give a single penny for it, I care for the health of US citizens only as much as they care for the health of citizens of other countries.
- icebraining 9y ago
  You're not thinking strategically. The US is one of the biggest emitters of CO2, and coal plants are about 1/3 of that. If the study can convince the population to reduce their use, even if with a different argument, that's helpful for the whole planet.
  - kodfodrasz 9y ago
    And what different argument? By giving them away money for free in addition to the amounts they ransack from the rest of the world already? (just think about 1$ = 1€ as an example)
    - icebraining 9y ago
      If the investment worked, sure. Cutting off the nose to spite the face is silly.
  - trapperkeeper74 9y ago
    James Cromwell was arrested for protesting a dirty and unnecessary coal power plant in NY, but I don't think it made a difference. I think academic research that's newsworthy has much more and different punch than direct action. Using the existing broadcasting platforms scales more that all the screaming and picketing in Times Square, grandmas with prayer stick beaten down, dogs dripping with human blood or girls arms blown off when the news isn't watching.
    - givinguflac 9y ago
      The flaw in your logic is that you assume any important outcome of said study will be seen as valid by the people in power who can do something about the results of the study. Many high power people in the government actively try to present scientists as liars and frauds, and you think we should just let the data speak for itself? How's that working out so far?
  - hasenj 9y ago
    You just admitted the would-be study actually has ulterior motives. That's not good.
    - schiffern 9y ago
      No ulterior motives were suggested. Just side-benefits.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      No, I suggested the hypothetical future international HN funders could have ulterior motives.
    - DFHippie 9y ago
      Almost all research has ulterior motives in this sense, particularly government-funded research. You want to guide policy so you collect information on the impact of that policy, existing or proposed. The alternative is to make policy in the absence of data. Research guided this way is problematic only if it amounts to cherry-picking of facts, studying only the benefits or costs to the exclusion of the other.
- csomar 9y ago
  > I'd be surprised if this "community" could gather money for anything remotely useful. You can't go right by starting an "attack" on a bunch of people of very diversified backgrounds and ideologies. > Also: I'd like to see the outcome of a fundraising, and the demographics of the donators, to see how many pledge outside of CA, and outside of the USA. This would give me an impression about the extent of the Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. If you are not my ally then you are my enemy. I'm really sick of this ideology. There is a whole set of people interested in green tech that have exactly 0 opinion in politics let alone Donald Trump. > Just to make it clear: I'd not give a single penny for it, I care for the health of US citizens only as much as they care for the health of citizens of other countries. This is just plainly and unnecessarily aggressive. It's like the "non-existant" fund-raising is relying on your donation. No it isn't. Just like the rest of the 7 billion humans and hundred of millions of other companies and entities.
  - kodfodrasz 9y ago
    > You can't go right by starting an "attack" on a bunch of people of very diversified backgrounds and ideologies. Yes I can. I just did it. Btw. according to the law if I attacked people of homogenous backgrounds I could be punished (for racism and hate crimes). But Diverse people? Well... Also: don't tell me what to do. note: your server is down (the one linked in your profile)
- chillwaves 9y ago
  > Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. I've never heard this angle, in fact it is his supporters who embrace ideologies that involve Satan, not the other way around.
trapperkeeper74 9y ago
Sounds good and it would send a message.
AhIDc7xgZ2 9y ago
The readership won't because they're corporate pawns. I'd bet what's in my bank account on it right now.

by nroach 9y ago

The study's budget was only $1m. Seems like the readership of HN could easily pull that money together and donate the funding, if the researchers could accept it.

kodfodrasz 9y ago

I'd be surprised if this "community" could gather money for anything remotely useful. Also: I'd like to see the outcome of a fundraising, and the demographics of the donators, to see how many pledge outside of CA, and outside of the USA. This would give me an impression about the extent of the Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. (imho nothing changes, things proceed with trump as before. business as usual) Just to make it clear: I'd not give a single penny for it, I care for the health of US citizens only as much as they care for the health of citizens of other countries.

icebraining 9y ago
You're not thinking strategically. The US is one of the biggest emitters of CO2, and coal plants are about 1/3 of that. If the study can convince the population to reduce their use, even if with a different argument, that's helpful for the whole planet.
- kodfodrasz 9y ago
  And what different argument? By giving them away money for free in addition to the amounts they ransack from the rest of the world already? (just think about 1$ = 1€ as an example)
  - icebraining 9y ago
    If the investment worked, sure. Cutting off the nose to spite the face is silly.
- trapperkeeper74 9y ago
  James Cromwell was arrested for protesting a dirty and unnecessary coal power plant in NY, but I don't think it made a difference. I think academic research that's newsworthy has much more and different punch than direct action. Using the existing broadcasting platforms scales more that all the screaming and picketing in Times Square, grandmas with prayer stick beaten down, dogs dripping with human blood or girls arms blown off when the news isn't watching.
  - givinguflac 9y ago
    The flaw in your logic is that you assume any important outcome of said study will be seen as valid by the people in power who can do something about the results of the study. Many high power people in the government actively try to present scientists as liars and frauds, and you think we should just let the data speak for itself? How's that working out so far?
- hasenj 9y ago
  You just admitted the would-be study actually has ulterior motives. That's not good.
  - schiffern 9y ago
    No ulterior motives were suggested. Just side-benefits.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    No, I suggested the hypothetical future international HN funders could have ulterior motives.
  - DFHippie 9y ago
    Almost all research has ulterior motives in this sense, particularly government-funded research. You want to guide policy so you collect information on the impact of that policy, existing or proposed. The alternative is to make policy in the absence of data. Research guided this way is problematic only if it amounts to cherry-picking of facts, studying only the benefits or costs to the exclusion of the other.
csomar 9y ago
> I'd be surprised if this "community" could gather money for anything remotely useful. You can't go right by starting an "attack" on a bunch of people of very diversified backgrounds and ideologies. > Also: I'd like to see the outcome of a fundraising, and the demographics of the donators, to see how many pledge outside of CA, and outside of the USA. This would give me an impression about the extent of the Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. If you are not my ally then you are my enemy. I'm really sick of this ideology. There is a whole set of people interested in green tech that have exactly 0 opinion in politics let alone Donald Trump. > Just to make it clear: I'd not give a single penny for it, I care for the health of US citizens only as much as they care for the health of citizens of other countries. This is just plainly and unnecessarily aggressive. It's like the "non-existant" fund-raising is relying on your donation. No it isn't. Just like the rest of the 7 billion humans and hundred of millions of other companies and entities.
- kodfodrasz 9y ago
  > You can't go right by starting an "attack" on a bunch of people of very diversified backgrounds and ideologies. Yes I can. I just did it. Btw. according to the law if I attacked people of homogenous backgrounds I could be punished (for racism and hate crimes). But Diverse people? Well... Also: don't tell me what to do. note: your server is down (the one linked in your profile)
chillwaves 9y ago
> Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. I've never heard this angle, in fact it is his supporters who embrace ideologies that involve Satan, not the other way around.

trapperkeeper74 9y ago

Sounds good and it would send a message.

AhIDc7xgZ2 9y ago

The readership won't because they're corporate pawns. I'd bet what's in my bank account on it right now.