3 ms·

At some point an individual has to come to terms with the fact that 99% (or some equally large percentage) of human economic activity has nothing much to do wit

At some point an individual has to come to terms with the fact that 99% (or some equally large percentage) of human economic activity has nothing much to do with improving the human condition, but is rather beer and circuses writ large. You can cure a disease for the cost of a large video game development these days, and an election year of political donations in the US could be used to cure aging. Medical research in general is a sliver of the economic activity spent kicking leather balls around grassy fields. This is the world. The only way to make it better is to do what you can to add to the sliver rather than to the circuses.

Jimmy 13y ago
On the other hand, if all of those "circuses" disappeared tomorrow - not just the sports, but the music, the art, the novels, the films, the video games, everything - you probably wouldn't like it very much.
theorique 13y ago
People vote with their money and attention and time.
anoncow 13y ago
Living includes staying happy. If playing games makes you happy, the game developer is doing a useful job for you. If the developer is happy making games, he is doing a useful job for himself too.
ecopoesis 13y ago
You don't believe art and sport improve the human condition? I would argue that what you dismiss as circuses are actually what make life living. Being a scientist or engineer is fine, but is far from the only way to make the world better. Life would be very drab if all art and sport stopped tommorrow.
- ahomescu1 13y ago
  Arts and sports improve the present, science improves the future.
  - Charos 13y ago
    True and true, but what good is 'improving the future' if there's nothing to enjoy once we get there? A lot of modern technology revolves around content distribution and consumption. Someone has to make that content in the first place in order for consumer tech to improve our benefit from it. Both sides are important.
rayiner 13y ago
The total cost of the 2012 election was $6.3 billion, about half of which was the Presidential election, so over a period of 4 years you're looking at roughly 2.4 billion per year. That would do jack shit for curing aging or even an important disease. The NIH spends $30 billion per year on those things. We do the beer and circuses because they're cheaper than large-scale human advancements. The Manhattan project was $30 billion. Apollo was about $135 billion. The interstate highway system was $400-500 billion. (Inflation adjusted).
- exratione 13y ago
  The cost of implementing SENS, a detailed research plan to demonstrate rejuvenation in old mice, is between $1 to $2 billion over 20 years. Of the NIH budget, much less than 1% goes towards ways to intervene in aging I'm sorry to say. The NIA yearly budget is ~$1 billion, and of that very little has anything to do with actually altering the course of aging.
  - gte910h 13y ago
    SENS is really fishy. Computer people I know love the idea. Biological research people I know think the guy is talking out his ass and hand waving most of it. I do think aging based research is the future, I just worry that SENS is a boondoggle that could put us off aging research permanently. Organ printing is getting sizable investment right now. That will do a good job at a lot of problems.
eli_gottlieb 13y ago
At some point an individual has to come to terms with the fact that 99% (or some equally large percentage) of human economic activity has nothing much to do with improving the human condition, but is rather beer and circuses writ large. Shouldn't that say, "hero-worshiping wannabe-Elon-Musk entrepreneurship culture has to come to terms..."? Because frankly, if someone handed me the kind of money Elon Musk has, I could work on ludicrously quixotic AwesomeCool stuff too. No guarantees any of it would actually work or make money, of course, which is why the real business environment produces Angry Birds instead of "changing the world" (which is a lot harder than it sounds, since most changes aren't even that radical) every 6 months.

Jimmy 13y ago

On the other hand, if all of those "circuses" disappeared tomorrow - not just the sports, but the music, the art, the novels, the films, the video games, everything - you probably wouldn't like it very much.

theorique 13y ago

People vote with their money and attention and time.

anoncow 13y ago

Living includes staying happy. If playing games makes you happy, the game developer is doing a useful job for you. If the developer is happy making games, he is doing a useful job for himself too.

ecopoesis 13y ago

You don't believe art and sport improve the human condition? I would argue that what you dismiss as circuses are actually what make life living. Being a scientist or engineer is fine, but is far from the only way to make the world better. Life would be very drab if all art and sport stopped tommorrow.

ahomescu1 13y ago
Arts and sports improve the present, science improves the future.
- Charos 13y ago
  True and true, but what good is 'improving the future' if there's nothing to enjoy once we get there? A lot of modern technology revolves around content distribution and consumption. Someone has to make that content in the first place in order for consumer tech to improve our benefit from it. Both sides are important.

rayiner 13y ago

The total cost of the 2012 election was $6.3 billion, about half of which was the Presidential election, so over a period of 4 years you're looking at roughly 2.4 billion per year. That would do jack shit for curing aging or even an important disease. The NIH spends $30 billion per year on those things. We do the beer and circuses because they're cheaper than large-scale human advancements. The Manhattan project was $30 billion. Apollo was about $135 billion. The interstate highway system was $400-500 billion. (Inflation adjusted).

exratione 13y ago
The cost of implementing SENS, a detailed research plan to demonstrate rejuvenation in old mice, is between $1 to $2 billion over 20 years. Of the NIH budget, much less than 1% goes towards ways to intervene in aging I'm sorry to say. The NIA yearly budget is ~$1 billion, and of that very little has anything to do with actually altering the course of aging.
- gte910h 13y ago
  SENS is really fishy. Computer people I know love the idea. Biological research people I know think the guy is talking out his ass and hand waving most of it. I do think aging based research is the future, I just worry that SENS is a boondoggle that could put us off aging research permanently. Organ printing is getting sizable investment right now. That will do a good job at a lot of problems.

eli_gottlieb 13y ago

At some point an individual has to come to terms with the fact that 99% (or some equally large percentage) of human economic activity has nothing much to do with improving the human condition, but is rather beer and circuses writ large. Shouldn't that say, "hero-worshiping wannabe-Elon-Musk entrepreneurship culture has to come to terms..."? Because frankly, if someone handed me the kind of money Elon Musk has, I could work on ludicrously quixotic AwesomeCool stuff too. No guarantees any of it would actually work or make money, of course, which is why the real business environment produces Angry Birds instead of "changing the world" (which is a lot harder than it sounds, since most changes aren't even that radical) every 6 months.