'Fit' cannot be meaningful unless 'unfit' too is, and the unfit are set to some real disadvantage. Trying to attain equality over both fit and unfit is detrimental when taken collectively. Having ethics defined in a way that in practice, those who follow ethics suffer more while those who don't follow have higher chances of success, is not good.
Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
21–30 of 80 posts
Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#22If I had the Infinity Stones [1], I'll redefine human legal, political, cultural practices and beliefs so that we set right fitness function as it relates to 'survival of the fittest'. Nature evolved its own criteria for what is fit and unfit. We humans have twisted those around with our beliefs and systems, often for good, but often incorrectly and often inconsistently. 'Fit' cannot be meaningful unless 'unfit' too…
Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#23Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#24If I had the Infinity Stones [1], I'll redefine human legal, political, cultural practices and beliefs so that we set right fitness function as it relates to 'survival of the fittest'. Nature evolved its own criteria for what is fit and unfit. We humans have twisted those around with our beliefs and systems, often for good, but often incorrectly and often inconsistently. 'Fit' cannot be meaningful unless 'unfit' too…
What your describing is social Darwinism, an argument used by fascist.
Edit: Reading up on Social Darwinism on Wikipedia, Britannica and History.com, I guess not. Social Darwinism seems either not well-defined and/or assumes that the fitness functions that natural evolution worked out need to be taken nearly as it is. I am not saying the latter.
I am saying there needs to be more clearly defined fitness functions (call them performance criteria, KPIs, etc.), defined for the modern times, which then need to be more consistently followed. This isn't much different than using gradient descent algorithm where some weights are changed in accordance to their impact on the chosen loss function.
Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#25A global rail network. Homestly, I just think it'd be kinda awesome. If you asked your local politicians if it would take unlimited funds to get started they'd likely say yes. Haha.
Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#26Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#27Years ago I watched a video of a young woman foreign worker from I think Philippines kill herself because of abuse. It really haunted me. And more research showed it's pretty common, as well as unsafe labor to the point of death, mostly all in middle eastern countries. So, since then, my answer is modern day slavery. Wherever and however it exists. Don't need unlimited resources to start, just to make a living. Would…
This is one I have personally donated to, but there are others: https://www.barnabasaid.org/gb/latest-needs/free-christian-f...
If you wanted more hands-on, I'm guessing there is room for expansion in ending inter-generational debt bondage.
Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#28* I would create software licensing. This would identify persons capable of writing original software and assuming business ethics and liability for the products they create. This a massive gap in software. You can’t do any other professional job without a license.
Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#29Along the way we’ll be solving for energy, jobs, resources, environment and existential risk.
Re: Ask HN: What problem would you solve with unlimited resources?
#30In my eyes the greatest challenge is to find a way to enable humanity to live in a way that does no longer destroy the ecosystem it relies on.
Unfortunately, the solution won't be just technological but rather social, educational and political.
We must find ways to stop overconsumption, overpopulation and to teach children (and people in general) the value of our natural environment.