Radiation hormesis is one of those junk science topics that persists in the literature despite many thorough efforts to debunk it.
Looking at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis
I see a mix with no consensus.
Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
141–150 of 312 posts
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
And if you think about it, most of these disruptive companies are not offering real growth. Both Über and Air BNB, for instance are diverting dollars from the legacy provider. And they're doing this by offering better service and/or lower prices. There is no value creation to see here.
Well they are funding very ambitious stuff like nuclear power startups and AI initiatives, which most others usually shy away from. This is potentially extremely disruptive and a massive boon to the economy. And your assessment of Airbnb of just "diverting dollars from the legacy provider" is wrong in my opinion, it turns an unused space into cash (creating a new market/enabling an underserved market), just like earl…
AirBNB turns my unused space into cash but also keeps me from staying at a hotel. These businesses are certainly adding value for their shareholders and customers. They are not generally expanding the economy. I should also admit that many existing business models should be disrupted.
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#143I love Sam and just wish they would have used a different metaphor than "Manifest Destiny". Isn't manifest destiny what led to the genocide of native american populations?
Don't Sam and other YC folks thinks that technological innovation will put most people out of a job, necessitating a "basic income" which makes them permanent government dependents?
Aren't we all government dependents? You can't live without the government.
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It doesn't resemble the Hacker News I look at, and I look at HN a lot." Given your position, do you think that you can look at HN objectively?
It would not be wise to argue with someone who can hellban you. Even if it is purely logical and factual in nature. Lobste.rs is also a good HN-alt. A bit more groupthink on common topics, and less groupthink on VC stuff.
No, we don't ban people for arguing with us.
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although we banned this account for abuse elsewhere in the thread, I'm unkilling this comment because it's so patently untrue. It doesn't resemble the Hacker News I look at, and I look at HN a lot. It's also factually incorrect, both re idlewords (whose latest piece spent most of the day at #1 on HN) and everyone else who uses this site in the intended spirit. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.…
"It doesn't resemble the Hacker News I look at, and I look at HN a lot." Given your position, do you think that you can look at HN objectively?
I sure don't. But see that word 'patently'.
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
...which makes this statement seem awfully silly: "Democracy only works in a growing economy. Without a return to economic growth, the democratic experiment will fail. And I have to think that YC is hugely important to that growth."
Yeah, if companies are homogenous then that's fair, but it's not a stretch to believe that certain types of companies require VC funds more than others... in which case losing VC as a funding option would mean up to 20% of new companies fail at the concept stage, or have a harder time. Based on that I think "awfully silly" is a bit unfair.
Sam's contention, as far as I can tell, is that YC is hugely important to economic growth. Startups are a small fraction of growth. Of that small fraction, a fraction (20%) require VC funds. Of that fraction, another fraction may not have made it but for YC. So, we're looking at a fraction of a fraction of a fraction that YC is involved with. I'd say that suggesting that YC is hugely, or even just important, to economic growth is absurd (and reflects the massively outsized view SV has of itself).
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#147So, Sam's been at this for 2 years, inherited an extremely well oiled machine, and hasn't, as far as I know, accomplished anything extraordinary. Not sure why there's an entire New Yorker piece on him, instead of, say, I dunno, a few paragraphs in the Talk of the Town section. Has there been a New Yorker piece on PG? I googled and didn't find anything. He's the one that put all this together and seems far more deserv…
Actually, YC has expanded radically under the 2 years Sam has been running it, and all the expansion is purely Sam's doing. If you read the article, it discusses all this in detail.
I did read the article. I'm sure Sam has done good things. I still don't see anything which warrants a piece in the New Yorker.
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would not be wise to argue with someone who can hellban you. Even if it is purely logical and factual in nature. Lobste.rs is also a good HN-alt. A bit more groupthink on common topics, and less groupthink on VC stuff.
No, we don't ban people for arguing with us.
Not anymore. :-)
Whatever faults dang may have, he's not a capricious moderator, and he works hard to be fair.
Since I got called out my name, let me say that no one has tried to "filter me out" of HN since Paul Graham stopped moderating the site.
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#149I continue to be impressed by the quality of The New Yorker's reporting. This is so far above and beyond most media coverage about Altman and YC.
My impression: It is 46 pages printed. I opened the link, read three paragraphs, and still not a word about the Manifest Destiny mentioned in the title. Closed it. Way too long. Way too much story telling.
Re: Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny
#150> "Most people want to be accepted, so they won't take risks that could make them look crazy."
This is a highly dissonant statement, so it's not surprising it's coming from a VC.
Innovation is exploring the crazy and coming back with something that can be shoehorned into reality without upsetting reality's tea cart too much. The problem with VCs is that their jobs consist of spending time investing in crazy things that have far reaching drawbacks that nobody sees until everyone is using the product and the founders and investors have already exited their position.