4 ms·

TL;DR - Guy who inspired a couple of interesting sci-fi ideas is speaking out on topics he knows nothing about. Shockingly, his uninformed opinion disagrees wit

by ebbv 8y ago

TL;DR - Guy who inspired a couple of interesting sci-fi ideas is speaking out on topics he knows nothing about. Shockingly, his uninformed opinion disagrees with people who are informed on the subjects.

convolvatron 8y ago
guy had an interesting speculation (derived from someone elses work) about dynamics of genetic evolution in small populations, and a general concern that there isn't enough science to figure out whats going to happen after the drastic rampup of atmospheric carbon. recommends planting lots of trees. doesn't make for an adequately clickbaity headline though
- gwern 8y ago
  The problem is, 'genetic drift' is not remotely controversial. Even Kimura's strong claim that drift is responsible for most genetic changes is a respectable position, and the debate is a rather pedestrian one of 'exactly how much change is drift versus selection' (like in the nature-nurture debate, the expert consensus has settled down to a centrist 'both do a lot and how exactly much of each depends on a lot of details and context'). Hard to see why Dyson thinks it's so exciting or a dangerous heresy. I was expecting more when he brought up Darwin...
dang 8y ago
This breaks the HN guidelines, which ask you not to post shallow dismissals to Hacker News. And also not to snark. You have a long history of breaking the HN guidelines and we've warned you and asked you to stop repeatedly. If you can't or won't stop, we'll eventually ban you, so could you please re-read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use this site as intended?
archgoon 8y ago
Freeman Dyson is the person responsible for legitimization and adoption of Feynmann diagrams, via proof of equivalence with Schwinger's methods. Feynmann didn't care about why his methods worked, Dyson did.
pokemongoaway 8y ago
Why such desperation for consensus?

by ebbv 8y ago

convolvatron 8y ago

guy had an interesting speculation (derived from someone elses work) about dynamics of genetic evolution in small populations, and a general concern that there isn't enough science to figure out whats going to happen after the drastic rampup of atmospheric carbon. recommends planting lots of trees. doesn't make for an adequately clickbaity headline though

gwern 8y ago
The problem is, 'genetic drift' is not remotely controversial. Even Kimura's strong claim that drift is responsible for most genetic changes is a respectable position, and the debate is a rather pedestrian one of 'exactly how much change is drift versus selection' (like in the nature-nurture debate, the expert consensus has settled down to a centrist 'both do a lot and how exactly much of each depends on a lot of details and context'). Hard to see why Dyson thinks it's so exciting or a dangerous heresy. I was expecting more when he brought up Darwin...

dang 8y ago

This breaks the HN guidelines, which ask you not to post shallow dismissals to Hacker News. And also not to snark. You have a long history of breaking the HN guidelines and we've warned you and asked you to stop repeatedly. If you can't or won't stop, we'll eventually ban you, so could you please re-read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use this site as intended?

archgoon 8y ago

Freeman Dyson is the person responsible for legitimization and adoption of Feynmann diagrams, via proof of equivalence with Schwinger's methods. Feynmann didn't care about why his methods worked, Dyson did.

pokemongoaway 8y ago

Why such desperation for consensus?