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

Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

longform.asmartbear.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 97 posts

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#81

Post by gnicholas »

jansan wrote: post #39
toast0 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because it would make it hard to start charging again later if we decided it was the wrong decision. You don't have to tell people it's free. Tell them it's free for the first year, and don't actually charge them for future years. Automatically extend their subscription at 30 days. Or only charge some people. Or cut them off when it expires, and then extend them 7 days after expiration. Lots of options if direct re…

Or put an "Early Access" label on that product. This will justify about any change that you do later. Fortnite was "Early Access" until 2020, when it had already made an estimated $15 billion (yes, with a "b") in revenue.

Does that work when the product has thousands of paying customers?

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#82

Post by dublinben »

gernb wrote: post #78
pjc50 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you really separate those, given that humans have to live in the environment?

yes you can. Because it will likely be decades before the environment kills people but you can save a life today. Oh, don't drive that ambulance to go pick someone up and rescue them, it pollutes! Where as other solutions may exist for the environment in the future. Here's another. Maybe no one should go hiking/camping/mountain climbing because the few that need to be rescued generally require cars/helicopters the bu…

Many people are killed by "the environment" every year already. This problem will only continue to get worse unless we make radical changes today.

Over 20,000 died in western Europe’s summer heatwaves [0]

Bangladesh, India floods kill over 100; millions in need of aid [1]

Climate Change Causes 5 Million Extra Deaths Per Year [2]

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/24/over-200...

[1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/21/bangladesh-india-fl...

[2] https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20210708/climate-ch...

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#83

Post by themitigating »

pjc50 wrote: post #54
themitigating wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would ask "When is it justified to put the environment over human life?"

Can you really separate those, given that humans have to live in the environment?

Humans don't have to live

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#84

Post by jansan »

gnicholas wrote: post #81
jansan wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or put an "Early Access" label on that product. This will justify about any change that you do later. Fortnite was "Early Access" until 2020, when it had already made an estimated $15 billion (yes, with a "b") in revenue.

Does that work when the product has thousands of paying customers?

No :)

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#85

Post by humane_tech »

college_physics wrote: post #46

I am missing: "How could we make the world a better place while doing good business?" Probably too extreme a question.

This is almost exactly the question that lead to the success of Humanitix.

https://www.humanitix.com/au/about-us.

https://www.afr.com/technology/tech-platform-reimagines-ethi...

There are a few other similar examples, like https://thankyou.co and https://au.whogivesacrap.org.

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#86

Post by magarnicle »

DrBazza wrote: post #38
ankit219 wrote: post #27

Very thought provoking read. One question I do wonder at times, and is probably applicable here is: "what if I removed all the constraints, what would I do differently and how would things change?". Eg: Suppose nuclear fusion is successful, and you can actually power whole of earth for 800 years with 1 cup of hydrogen. That is, you don't have to worry about energy anymore. How would that change the human behavior bot…

> "what if I removed all the constraints, what would I do differently and how would things change?". Eg: Suppose nuclear fusion is successful, and you can actually power whole of earth for 800 years with 1 cup of hydrogen. Build cheap and plentiful desalination plants on the west coasts of Africa, South America and Australia, and possibly re-green the Sahara and Outback.

How would you keep the Outback green? I'm no climate scientist, but I've wondered why it is the way it is. Is it due to the lack of a mountain range on the Australian west coast, so the air doesn't get pushed up to cool?

Edit I forgot in this imagined world we have 'free' energy, so you can just pump water in.

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#87

Post by themitigating »

pelasaco wrote: post #44
themitigating wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would ask "When is it justified to put the environment over human life?"

But it brings another questions with it: Do we need to provide Welfare to everyone at any cost?

Yes, why not?

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#88

Post by runnerup »

worldsayshi wrote: post #58
Arkhaine_kupo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going one step further. "How do we meaningfully calculate the total life cost of products? " Externalities, clean up costs etc are currently not being charged which makes some products economically viable when they probably shouldn't be. For example in China Coal plants keep getting opened, because despite a cheaper lifetime cost for solar, coal has a much lower upfront cost and without meaningful costs for environme…

I don't doubt the part about environment costs but: >you can always sell the fully profitable plant before the late life costs come and bite you Why wouldn't this be accounted for in the selling price (unless you scam the buyer)?

The highest bidder will generally always be making the most favorable assumptions of the future, some of which will turn out to be wrong.

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#89

Post by DrBazza »

magarnicle wrote: post #86
DrBazza wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "what if I removed all the constraints, what would I do differently and how would things change?". Eg: Suppose nuclear fusion is successful, and you can actually power whole of earth for 800 years with 1 cup of hydrogen. Build cheap and plentiful desalination plants on the west coasts of Africa, South America and Australia, and possibly re-green the Sahara and Outback.

How would you keep the Outback green? I'm no climate scientist, but I've wondered why it is the way it is. Is it due to the lack of a mountain range on the Australian west coast, so the air doesn't get pushed up to cool? Edit I forgot in this imagined world we have 'free' energy, so you can just pump water in.

From what I understand, Australia has a lot of temporary lakes that only fill after extreme rain, then dry out soon after.

So if you could keep lakes such as Lake Eyre (though it's salty) and others full, that would encourage plant growth, and coverage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Eyre

I can't find a link, but there's a theory (and I don't know if it's been discredited), but once again, because humans settled into Australia they displaced mega-fauna and generally ruined the ecosystem in Australia and the Outback now is what it is. Even today, there's a story doing the rounds about how free roaming bison in the US double the plant biodiversity of the plains just by trampling on stuff.

There are all sorts of plans to irrigate Australia such as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradfield_Scheme

Re: Extreme questions to trigger new, better ideas

#90

Post by pelasaco »

themitigating wrote: post #87
pelasaco wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it brings another questions with it: Do we need to provide Welfare to everyone at any cost?

Yes, why not?

I'm surprising you asking it here if in another comment you wrote "Humans don't have to live"[0].

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34316128

Post reply on HN