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

"Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

peternixey.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 164 posts

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#91

Post by Ensorceled »

xradionut wrote: post #77
napoleoncomplex wrote: post #43

I don't think the people who work on these "useless" apps are to blame, rather it's the system in which they are brought up in and in case of start-ups, are taught entrepreneurship in. Paul Graham himself says he advises every start-up to "work on something for which they are the initial market"[0], so every YC cycle you get numerous companies which solve the problems of young San Francisco residents ([1] for comic r…

"Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use..." Most of the problems with medical software is the doctors and medical administrators themselves. They get so used to be worshiped as Gods That Save Lives, they assume that they Know Everything About Everything. I've seen more software and busines…

I've developed for multiple medical companies and applications. This describes exactly 0 of the doctors, radiologists, surgeons, or researchers I worked with.

I quit the medical field because it's incredibly hard work and very difficult to succeed because of the additional hurdles (regulation, entrenched interests) unless you are a large corporation. And large corporations suck.

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#92

Post by xradionut »

carbocation wrote: post #88
xradionut wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use..." Most of the problems with medical software is the doctors and medical administrators themselves. They get so used to be worshiped as Gods That Save Lives, they assume that they Know Everything About Everything. I've seen more software and busines…

No, really, I discharged a patient from the hospital late the other day because the software gave me no indication that the 4 pieces of disconnected discharge orders/paperwork were missing a fifth piece that finalized the discharge. Software is a real problem.

Sounds like it's the paperwork/bureaucracy, not necessary the software that struggles to keep up with red tape.

My doctor had to sell her private practice and join a medical business group, just to keep up with the new insurance/government regulations. Healthcare in the US is insane...

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#93

Post by Ensorceled »

jballanc wrote: post #85

I think the author is close, but doesn't quite capture the entire reasoning behind "cure cancer" versus "disrupt dry-cleaning" or "new car manufacturer". The disparity between these things is not just a matter of probability of success, but also of the timeline over which success is realized. When I was just over a year-and-a-half into my Ph.D. training, I had something of an epiphany. At the time, I was designing an…

This is actually the best reason for government funding of basic and applied research. Society has to take the long view since individuals and corporations can not.

This is why it is scary that politics has degenerated to the point where even 4 year plans are becoming difficult.

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#94

Post by xradionut »

Ensorceled wrote: post #91
xradionut wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use..." Most of the problems with medical software is the doctors and medical administrators themselves. They get so used to be worshiped as Gods That Save Lives, they assume that they Know Everything About Everything. I've seen more software and busines…

I've developed for multiple medical companies and applications. This describes exactly 0 of the doctors, radiologists, surgeons, or researchers I worked with. I quit the medical field because it's incredibly hard work and very difficult to succeed because of the additional hurdles (regulation, entrenched interests) unless you are a large corporation. And large corporations suck.

It describes a significant percentage of doctors, lawyers and airline pilots I've coded for...

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#95

Post by eli_gottlieb »

exratione wrote: post #33

At some point an individual has to come to terms with the fact that 99% (or some equally large percentage) of human economic activity has nothing much to do with improving the human condition, but is rather beer and circuses writ large. You can cure a disease for the cost of a large video game development these days, and an election year of political donations in the US could be used to cure aging. Medical research i…

At some point an individual has to come to terms with the fact that 99% (or some equally large percentage) of human economic activity has nothing much to do with improving the human condition, but is rather beer and circuses writ large.

Shouldn't that say, "hero-worshiping wannabe-Elon-Musk entrepreneurship culture has to come to terms..."?

Because frankly, if someone handed me the kind of money Elon Musk has, I could work on ludicrously quixotic AwesomeCool stuff too.

No guarantees any of it would actually work or make money, of course, which is why the real business environment produces Angry Birds instead of "changing the world" (which is a lot harder than it sounds, since most changes aren't even that radical) every 6 months.

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#96

Post by VLM »

jballanc wrote: post #85

I think the author is close, but doesn't quite capture the entire reasoning behind "cure cancer" versus "disrupt dry-cleaning" or "new car manufacturer". The disparity between these things is not just a matter of probability of success, but also of the timeline over which success is realized. When I was just over a year-and-a-half into my Ph.D. training, I had something of an epiphany. At the time, I was designing an…

"How do you convince shareholders to invest their money if you can only promise returns on a 100+ year schedule?"

Use the religion biz model. It works for stuff like that.

Another alternative is the non-profit model.

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#97

Post by eli_gottlieb »

patio11 wrote: post #64
IanChiles wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great point, but the government seems to be hell-bent on making this impossible through laws like HIPAA, so while it may indeed be possible to make, the government is going to fight against you every single step of the way.

HIPAA is almost the perfect example of pg's schlep blindness thesis. (See article of same name.) Is it annoying? Yes. Does it add cost and complexity? Yes. Are any of the requirements of dubious to nil security value in many cases? Yes. (+) But HIPAA is not a barrier like "create a meaningful application from nothing" or "successfully navigate an enterprise sales purchasing process" is a barrier. After you've got a h…

As we would put it here in research academia, it doesn't require any original thinking, just mere effort.

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#98

Post by VLM »

If you destroy and corrupt businesses and the way of doing business, the only way to "do stuff" without having to hold your nose as much is new areas.

People have been curing cancer, admittedly at variable success rates, for decades. Medical industrial complex is much older. You're going to have to hold your nose pretty bad to eliminate cancer. Your triumphs will be via paying off political candidates to purchase laws, and patent warfare. Maybe something the "smart kids" do in the lab will matter, but probably not.

On the other hand mobile apps aren't as corrupt yet, therefore they're effective, therefore you can make money and businesses in them... for awhile, before they get tainted.

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#99

Post by eli_gottlieb »

cell303 wrote: post #87

Does anybody dare to argue that angry birds did provide more value to peoples lives than a cure for cancer? Why is it so obvious that curing cancer is the right thing to do as opposed to engaging in economic and cultural activity, which has been the norm for mankind as long as we have been around? (and by the way provides the social stability that is the very basis for any kind of progress at all) What's worse is the…

Which is better: getting your cancer successfully treated and then playing Angry Birds, or playing Angry Birds and then dying of cancer?

That is why.

Re: "Instead of cures for cancer we got Angry Birds"

#100

Post by ahomescu1 »

ecopoesis wrote: post #72
exratione wrote: post #33

At some point an individual has to come to terms with the fact that 99% (or some equally large percentage) of human economic activity has nothing much to do with improving the human condition, but is rather beer and circuses writ large. You can cure a disease for the cost of a large video game development these days, and an election year of political donations in the US could be used to cure aging. Medical research i…

You don't believe art and sport improve the human condition? I would argue that what you dismiss as circuses are actually what make life living. Being a scientist or engineer is fine, but is far from the only way to make the world better. Life would be very drab if all art and sport stopped tommorrow.

Arts and sports improve the present, science improves the future.
Post reply on HN