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

A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

littlebrown.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 363 posts

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#151

Post by Hannan »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #142
melling wrote: post #86

Very sad, of course. He's only 59. I've gotta admit that I'm also a bit angry. The war on cancer is 40 years old and we are still so far away from solving the problem(s). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Cancer The first commercial microprocessor was released in the same year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_4004 Solutions? Ideas? The list in my mind is starting to get painfully long: Randy Pausch (47), Steve J…

Jobs, more than likely, would have survived if he didn't try "alternative" cancer therapies. Banks did everything by the book and his outcome is poor, but at least he tried properly. http://osxdaily.com/2011/10/20/steve-jobs-refused-early-canc...

The 5-year survival for the earliest stage (I) neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer treated with surgery is 61%. The latest stage (IV) is 15%. Stage II puts you at about 50%.

That just doesn't seem like he "more than likely" would have survived to me, but looks more like a coin flip. And that was with the "good" pancreatic cancer.

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#152

Post by Nursie »

MrBra wrote: post #149
Nursie wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err.... no. It's more prevalent in some societies because we live longer and we don't any longer die of preventable infections. Our air is cleaner than it's been for a long time. Decent nutrition has never been cheaper or more widely available. Life expectancy has never been longer. We are not killing ourselves. OK so some are by overeating and doing no exercise, but in general you're talking nonsense.

and we've never ate so many chemical food preservatives, taste modifiers, colourants like we're eating now. we've never been exposed to so much radiations like we are now. mobile phones being the first source. and the list goes on. we definitely are doing something to ourselves.

and we've never ate so many chemical food preservatives, taste modifiers, colourants like we're eating now. we've never been exposed to so much radiations like we are now. mobile phones being the first source. yes we might be killing ourselves

This doesn't change the fact we're living longer, healthier lives than ever before.

I'm sure there's a lot more that we could be doing, I'm sure that there are things we do that we should stop doing for our own health BUT none of this supports the notion that cancer is a disease of western privilege and we're doing everything wrong. We're doing more right than we've ever done.

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#153

Post by dornab »

nawitus wrote: post #109
nnq wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't! If someone could freeze at least a small insect brain after it "learned something", unfreeze it and prove that it retained what it learned, I might have at least a grain of faith in this. Even getting an insect ganglia out on a feeder plate with electrodes, training it to respond in a way to a certain sequence of input electrical impulses and proving that after thawing and reanimation it still preserves t…

So your argument is that until it's "proven" that we can cryopreserve and then restore brains, the probability of success is zero? If you agree that the probability is non-zero, then you agree with the cryopreservation advocates. In addition, if you agree that it's non-zero, you must agree that it's better than doing nothing (which clearly has a zero chance of revival). Cryopreservation advocates do not claim that th…

What is the probability of dying and a super-natural being transferring you to heaven? It's non-zero. I've heard the same exact argument from ultra religious people.

I am all for keeping a bit of hope alive, but a non-zero chance argument on its own is not enough. What is the probability exactly, can it be proven.

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#154

Post by mryan »

nawitus wrote: post #110
mryan wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... is not so large that the original brain can't be reconstructed either by scanning it while still frozen or by repairing it with nano-bots. You might as well argue that nano-bots will be able to reanimate a body that has decomposed, and save money on all the freezing equipment. Perhaps that will be the case if given enough time, but we seem to be a long way away from that technology. The business model seems to…

>You might as well argue that nano-bots will be able to reanimate a body that has decomposed, and save money on all the freezing equipment. Perhaps that will be the case if given enough time, but we seem to be a long way away from that technology. No, you might not as well argue that. If you think you can, then please argue how you can retrive information from a completely decomposed brain. On the other hand, it's pr…

alphaoverlord understands the point I was making.

Both of these things are impossible, at the current level of tech.

One or both of them might become possible through the use of sufficiently advanced technology.

> On the other hand, it's pretty reasonable to assume that a cryopreserved brain preserves a lot of the information in the brain.

See, I don't think it's reasonable to assume this.

I believe that both of these things are equally possible - that is, not very possible at all.

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#155

Post by grego »

nawitus wrote: post #110
mryan wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... is not so large that the original brain can't be reconstructed either by scanning it while still frozen or by repairing it with nano-bots. You might as well argue that nano-bots will be able to reanimate a body that has decomposed, and save money on all the freezing equipment. Perhaps that will be the case if given enough time, but we seem to be a long way away from that technology. The business model seems to…

>You might as well argue that nano-bots will be able to reanimate a body that has decomposed, and save money on all the freezing equipment. Perhaps that will be the case if given enough time, but we seem to be a long way away from that technology. No, you might not as well argue that. If you think you can, then please argue how you can retrive information from a completely decomposed brain. On the other hand, it's pr…

If we draw something like an air-field on sand, it is reasonable to believe that the planes will start to land again...

Sounds like that "cargo cult" variety of science.

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#156

Post by pavel_lishin »

tjic wrote: post #59
xradionut wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I rank him in my top tier of writers along with John Barnes.

Excellent call-out on Barnes; he's one of the most under-rated authors out there. If you haven't read his stuff, pick it up.

I think the only novel of his I read was Finity, and that kind of turned me off.

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#157

Post by engtech »

hyperbovine wrote: post #147
venus wrote: post #44

This is horrible news. We are all poorer today, all of us. Banks is an inspiration to all who read him - of what could be, what can be, what is to be. Cancer has claimed a terrible toll in my life. Three in my immediate family and counting, the countdown very fast for one of them. And now it seems to have turned its unwelcome gaze to my intellectual treasures. I hate this disease, I despise it so much it's hard to ex…

More money is not what is needed here--we already pour tons of money into cancer research. What's needed are new ideas. If you really want to fight cancer, skip the startup and go to graduate school. Computational and mathematical approaches to understanding and fighting cancer are still in their infancy. There is a lot of scope for smart, motivated people to do good.

No, more money is needed. 41% of deaths are due to cancer. It really is one of the biggest problems we have as a species and we should spend more effort on it rather than the things we do spend effort on.

But I wholeheartedly agree that rather than trying to be a billg and earn money to fund philanthropy, the world needs more researchers.

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#159

Post by engtech »

StavrosK wrote: post #58
xradionut wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Player of Games is one of the few sci-fi books I recommend to readers interested in the genre.

Which Banks book should I start with? I was going to start with the Player of Games after your comment, but it turns out it's part of a series, and Consider Phlebas is the first one. Does it matter?

Actually, don't start with the books.

Read this webpage to get an introduction to the Culture. It's great, and it helps you get through some of the "rougher" edges in the earlier books.

http://nuwen.net/culture.html

Re: A Personal Statement from Iain Banks

#160

Post by engtech »

jvzr wrote: post #60
StavrosK wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Banks book should I start with? I was going to start with the Player of Games after your comment, but it turns out it's part of a series, and Consider Phlebas is the first one. Does it matter?

I've read in a Amazon review that it is recommended to start with Consider Phlebas , then The Player of Games and finally Use of Weapons (as a first start into the Culture, that is). I've bought them three myself and will read them in this order.

Read this: http://nuwen.net/culture.html

then: The Player of Games Consider Phlebas Use of Weapons

Use of Weapons is great, but the writing is poorer than the other two.

Post reply on HN