Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

nhm.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 97 posts

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#71

Post by spywaregorilla »

jon-wood wrote: post #68
spywaregorilla wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched the original, which was awesome. Newer one didn't appeal to me. It's a cute idea but that would be stupidly expensive. It would be difficult to compete with the nearby hotel that includes 10 robo-whores complementary with each night at 1/100th of the price; or a giga-chad sex machine that you can just purchase for home use. For sex, or, actually, just as a worker to do real labor because that's a hugely val…

I think you've summed up the biggest immersion breaker in that program for me. At some point a character mentions a cost of $40,000/day, which seems like a huge amount until you look at how much staff is needed to keep the park running (including apparently an entire private army), and the amount of damage done on a daily basis which then needs fixing.

That's pretty funny. Strictly speaking, there has to be more robots than people in the park at any time. Probably by a factor of 10-20 or so if you want people to feel like the real people tourists are a small minority. Implying each robot is earning about $2,000-4,000/day. Ignoring the fact that they get destroyed and other fixed costs, it would take years to pay these things off assuming they cost upwards of $10M each.

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#73

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

BurningFrog wrote: post #41
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #17

I think this is considerably more difficult than they think, genomes are more than just throwing genes together. It’s a finely tuned symphony made by evolution, epigenetic silencing and signaling, gene position. I suspect it doesn’t work at all but if they got something it would be more like the centaurs in Fallout. I also think there are ethical questions whether that baby “mammoth” being born would ask to be create…

You only learn how difficult it is by attempting it. We breed zillions of animals without ever asking them for consent. In part because it's impossible. Those are some brand new goalposts.

Evolution constricts those outcomes to something at least somewhat reasonable and capable of life because both parents were able to live.

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#74

Post by jjoonathan »

throwaway889900 wrote: post #67
jjoonathan wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do the dinosaurs always escape in Jurassic Park? Is it because the mathematics of chaos theory dictate that life always finds a way? Or is it because nobody pays to see a movie where a couple of brats go on an uneventful vacation to a dinosaur zoo? It's definitely the latter, but through the power of repetition people started to believe it was the former.

Isn't it almost always that the safeguards in place are poor? Either poorly maintained or the caretakers don't care at all.

Jurassic Park is a great example of hard scifi in that the problems which happen all happen in believable ways.

It's still fiction and not an attempt to realistically estimate the rate at which problems would happen or the magnitude of those problems if they did. Look to zoos if you want a realistic point of comparison for the risk analysis -- but not if you want to watch a T-Rex chase kids in Jeeps.

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#75

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

jjoonathan wrote: post #26
JoeCianflone wrote: post #2

What’s the line from Jurassic Park? “They were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should”

Why do the dinosaurs always escape in Jurassic Park? Is it because the mathematics of chaos theory dictate that life always finds a way? Or is it because nobody pays to see a movie where a couple of brats go on an uneventful vacation to a dinosaur zoo? It's definitely the latter, but through the power of repetition people started to believe it was the former.

Neither. It's because it's extremely difficult to keep large animals confined indefinitely through all circumstances. Ask any farmer with livestock. The bigger they are, the more capable they are of ignoring whatever fencing/obstacles you put in the way.

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#76

Post by gruez »

jon-wood wrote: post #68
spywaregorilla wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched the original, which was awesome. Newer one didn't appeal to me. It's a cute idea but that would be stupidly expensive. It would be difficult to compete with the nearby hotel that includes 10 robo-whores complementary with each night at 1/100th of the price; or a giga-chad sex machine that you can just purchase for home use. For sex, or, actually, just as a worker to do real labor because that's a hugely val…

I think you've summed up the biggest immersion breaker in that program for me. At some point a character mentions a cost of $40,000/day, which seems like a huge amount until you look at how much staff is needed to keep the park running (including apparently an entire private army), and the amount of damage done on a daily basis which then needs fixing.

>which seems like a huge amount until you look at how much staff is needed to keep the park running (including apparently an entire private army), and the amount of damage done on a daily basis which then needs fixing.

[Spoiler]

They did mention that the real money maker for the park was information collection, not the admission fees.

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#77

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

jjoonathan wrote: post #74
throwaway889900 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it almost always that the safeguards in place are poor? Either poorly maintained or the caretakers don't care at all.

Jurassic Park is a great example of hard scifi in that the problems which happen all happen in believable ways. It's still fiction and not an attempt to realistically estimate the rate at which problems would happen or the magnitude of those problems if they did. Look to zoos if you want a realistic point of comparison for the risk analysis -- but not if you want to watch a T-Rex chase kids in Jeeps.

Yep. I was actually thinking of zoos as a counterpoint to my post upthread. But the difference is that of scale: how do you allow a T-Rex or a herd of brachiosaurs the square miles they need for their territory and still keep them within that territory? You may as well just say, "let's not bother fencing them in and just use the ocean itself as the barrier."

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#78

Post by spywaregorilla »

gruez wrote: post #76
jon-wood wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've summed up the biggest immersion breaker in that program for me. At some point a character mentions a cost of $40,000/day, which seems like a huge amount until you look at how much staff is needed to keep the park running (including apparently an entire private army), and the amount of damage done on a daily basis which then needs fixing.

>which seems like a huge amount until you look at how much staff is needed to keep the park running (including apparently an entire private army), and the amount of damage done on a daily basis which then needs fixing. [Spoiler] They did mention that the real money maker for the park was information collection, not the admission fees.

What information could they possibly be collecting?

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#79

Post by edgyquant »

dylan604 wrote: post #48
stupidcar wrote: post #16

I remember reading a cryptozoological theory that there could still be some mammoths left, hidden in the vastness of Siberia. Absurd, obviously, but I always thought you could make a great film about a ragtag crew searching for the last remaining mammoth tribe in the wilderness.

One country has a legend of mammoths. One country has Loch Ness monster. Another has sasquatch. Another has yeti. Some even have dragons or sea creatures.

>mammoths, Loch Ness monster, sasquatch, yeti, dragons or sea creatures

One of these is not like the others

Re: Entrepreneur plans to resurrect woolly mammoths

#80

Post by gruez »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #78
gruez wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>which seems like a huge amount until you look at how much staff is needed to keep the park running (including apparently an entire private army), and the amount of damage done on a daily basis which then needs fixing. [Spoiler] They did mention that the real money maker for the park was information collection, not the admission fees.

What information could they possibly be collecting?

excerpt from wikipedia synopsis:

>Arnold organizes a demonstration of the hosts to convince Logan to invest in Westworld. Logan's father, James Delos, is critical of his son's actions until William persuades him that the park can be used to spy on the guests. James proceeds to buy out the park and name William as his successor.

Post reply on HN