3 ms·

> How does one prioritize from among the jillion things that might be tested? Importance. Polluting the oceans is a fairly important problem, and we have the c

> How does one prioritize from among the jillion things that might be tested? Importance. Polluting the oceans is a fairly important problem, and we have the capacity as a species to attempt to address more than one issue at a time. > One way is to deprioritize the ones where there are many reasons why it's unlikely to work. When Kennedy announced he wanted a man on the Moon within 10 years, the USA had only barely put a man into orbit around the Earth and certainly hadn't managed to break orbit. There were many reasons that goal was unlikely to work too. Almost all of the Pioneer and Ranger programs that preceded Apollo failed in one way or another, but they learned enough each time to take the next step. The early launches were just intended to fly at the Moon, and later to try to smash into it to figure out how to. I guess my point is that when the goal is important you don't necessarily need to start out with all the answers already in your pocket. > If you really believe we should start from random nonsense, then let's schedule 1200 GMT on New Year's Day for the world day of meditation to cure the planet. If enough people meditate, then the power of our brainwaves will heal the planet. I don't think this part of your comment should be on HN. You probably realise that already, right?

eesmith 8y ago
Importance is how we decide which things to address. My question concerned how to prioritize the billions of ways which might done to address those problems. The goal of putting someone on the Moon was primarily an engineering challenge. An expensive engineering challenge, but the outlines were already worked out through in-house and three external feasibility studies which ended a week before Kennedy made the announcement. We don't have comparable successful feasibility studies for how to remove plastic from the seas. Or, if we do - where are they? Do I take it that you disagree (as I do) with TeMPOraL's suggestion that we start from 'random nonsense'? Because if TeMPOraL's statement is correct, then suggesting global mediation as a solution is an appropriate comment for HN. Which was my point.

eesmith 8y ago

Importance is how we decide which things to address. My question concerned how to prioritize the billions of ways which might done to address those problems. The goal of putting someone on the Moon was primarily an engineering challenge. An expensive engineering challenge, but the outlines were already worked out through in-house and three external feasibility studies which ended a week before Kennedy made the announcement. We don't have comparable successful feasibility studies for how to remove plastic from the seas. Or, if we do - where are they? Do I take it that you disagree (as I do) with TeMPOraL's suggestion that we start from 'random nonsense'? Because if TeMPOraL's statement is correct, then suggesting global mediation as a solution is an appropriate comment for HN. Which was my point.