Live data from Hacker News

Why the Fuck?

raganwald.posterous.com

451–460 of 528 posts

Re: Why the Fuck?

#451
post #313
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A short question: have you ever worked in research? Or know well anyone working in academia? First, many problems there are much harder just to get to the level that one can do any valuable contribution. And approaching them goes well beyond reading tutorial, playing with it, asking some questions on SE, being expert. In mathematics, or medicine, it's rather years than weeks. Second, many deep problems are not that e…

Very good points. I work as a bioinformatics scientist at Novo Nordisk, and we take our jobs very seriously in trying to find medicine for diabetes and other autoimmune diseases - and we feel lucky to have this possibility of success. It is very difficult because of many reasons, especially because each iteration (drug) takes years and costs millions of dollars to try out and hundreds of patients to volunteer to inje…

And one more point (also: the rationale for regulations in medicine) - in programming you are allowed to risk a lot more. Create a social network and the it fails? No problem! Running out of money so you need to shout down you server? OK!

And in general - approach "we have no idea if it is going to work, but let's try!".

In medicine, a failure may cost thousands of lives (and in past it did, a lot of times), so time and cost overhead is enormous.

Re: Why the Fuck?

#452
post #122
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would hope it's uncontroversial that saving people's lives, health and sanity is categorically more important than making money or trivial social interaction.

When you save those people's lives, health, and sanity, what are they going to do with themselves? "trivial" social interactions. Facebook alone has been brought indescribable joy to thousands of grandmas.

Funny you should mention grandmas. In the words of mine: "I hate that facebook thing. Nobody calls me any more."

Re: Why the Fuck?

#453
post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a other point of view, if one looks at who is paying the cost of the medical research: The public. How is medical research founding supported? In order of prominence: Tax money from NIH. State granted and enforced monopoly in the form of patents. State granted extended monopoly (after the patent is expired) which is granted by the FDA, including exclusivity to the data from testing. There is also affects fro…

Lot of important points to engage there, and generally agree with the spirit of the comments. I think many biotech startups would instantly take a deal that gave them and their patients the ability to opt-out of FDA, in exchange for some demonstration that they aren't using public funds (e.g. committing to not use some fraction of the research literature, ineligibility for all govt grants, etc.). Regarding patents, t…

I prefer a more clean structure in which one pick one scheme and go with it. If tax money is supposed to be the major way to fund medical research, then the goal (effective treatement) and the cost (tax dollars) should be combined to get the most treatments for least amount of dollars. The current system is not cost effective, and no attempt at even trying to bring it into some form of cost effective control has even been made. Current system is to first pump tax dollar at research, then throw state monopolies and exclusive right to medical companies so they will take the tax produced research and produce products, which in effect means that the products with the most earning under least effort gets made. Treatment effectiveness just happens to get lost in the transition, and get traded for profit vs production costs. That can not be the best use of tax money, or the power of granting state monopolies.

The $31B is considered to be 1/3 of all funding for all medical research (including humans and pets/animals). In the area of core research, including those illnesses that are life threatening, then NiH stands for around 95% of the funding.

Having the government do the research, including the testing, and then let generics do the production of the devices/drugs (under somewhat high taxes) could be one way to do it. It would likely be considerable cheaper than the current system, as it would have a hard time doing worse than the current system. The ("we are not worse than the other guy") slogan might not the best, but it would be a start to get somewhere better than now.

Or, they could do the opposite, pulling out from funding medical research. The government do not fund the research for most things. Maybe those 31B$ could be better spent elsewhere and thus force pharma to be self-dependent.

In regard to academics... If Academia fund some research, then same rule again apply. Follow the money. Is it tax money, private researchers money, or institution money that funded the research. If its tax money, then the research belongs in public domain. If its the researchers private money, then its the researchers that decide of the research. If its the institution and the research is funded by private inventors, then its the institutions decision. I might not like it when research is not published to the public domain (will considered it a bit immoral), but primarily one should honor the investor with the result of the funding. If that investor is the public, it should be illegal to prevent the public access to to the result. That include universities that is state funded.

Re: Why the Fuck?

#454
Why the fuck? I'll tell you why. Because true innovation is too far and few in between, because it took us 60,000 years to realize that we can plant our own crops, that we can cultivate and breed our own farm animals.

Because it took us a good few thousand years to understand that there is more to life than just bashing each other with stones and sticks.

Because coming up with something new, and having the guts to share it with your community, and not being killed for it is still rather rare today.

Because it took us almost 1,500 to "accept" the fact that we're on a spherical object, not being held by a bunch of turtles. Because some of us are still not convinced that this is true.

Because most of the time we're not actually creating anything new, but instead try to improve something that was already there, because we're afraid thinking out of the box. Because our society loves new stuff as long as it doesn't change their old views, and most of the truly revolutionary ideas are just that, shattering our older views.

Because we're distrustful apes that think that their youngsters are naive or just plain stupid. Because we think that our 5 year-old's are too young to see the naked body of a human being.

Because our society teaches our kids how to suppress originality from the very first days in schools and throughout their "education", which is just a pretty word for enslavement camps that teach our population how to be obedient, unoriginal parrots.

Because if you ask 95% of humanity who they believe more, their parents or the scientists that tell them something different than what their parents (and their parents parents) said or think, they'll tell you they prefer the "truth" of their parents, ignoring facts, experiments, and their own eyes.

Because we have patent laws that do nothing but prevent true innovation. Because a lot of the ideas that we have are already protected by some stupid law and we can't actually do that. Because we can't experiment with human embryonic cells because we consider them sacred and at the same time we allow the slaughter of millions of people around the world, deny them the food that we throw away in the garbage because we simply can't consume that much.

Because we distrust each other and we intimidate and sometimes execute those who do something different. Because we're so arrogant that we're always sure that we know best, and this new thing that someone just mentioned to you won't work because of a million reasons.

But mainly, because we're lazy as fuck, and we rather complain about why we don't have anything truly new and life improving, and replying to those rants explaining the reasoning behind it.

Why? Because you're too squared in. Because you're too afraid to truly say what's on your mind. Because you don't want others to think that you're crazy. Because if you don't conform, society will reject you. And new things, are by definition, non-conforming.

Now go and create something new. I dare you.

Re: Why the Fuck?

#455
Simple. Ad work pays better and is less hard work. Same reason people become radiologists and gps instead of working in the er.

Make the other shit pay better and you'll be flooded with applications. I only live once and I don't intend to be a sacrifice on the altar of science when I can easily live a great life pushing cat pictures to a sedentary work force.

Do I feel bad about that? Not really. I have bills to pay.

Re: Why the Fuck?

#457
post #454

Why the fuck? I'll tell you why. Because true innovation is too far and few in between, because it took us 60,000 years to realize that we can plant our own crops, that we can cultivate and breed our own farm animals. Because it took us a good few thousand years to understand that there is more to life than just bashing each other with stones and sticks. Because coming up with something new, and having the guts to sh…

I create things all the time. (shrugs)

Ain't that hard if you put more effort into the code than the soliloquy.

Re: Why the Fuck?

#458
post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They need to change the stupid name already. Hypoinsulinomia and caloroglucitis, or something.

So totally agree. Especially when I learned of how many young type 1s have eating disorders because they think they must be fat :(

That the general population does not distinguish between Type I and Type II Diabetes it an unfortunate fact of life. But that someone who is diagnosed with Type I Diabetes does not inform himself about it and learn about the difference is simply inexcusable stupidity.

Re: Why the Fuck?

#459
post #454

Why the fuck? I'll tell you why. Because true innovation is too far and few in between, because it took us 60,000 years to realize that we can plant our own crops, that we can cultivate and breed our own farm animals. Because it took us a good few thousand years to understand that there is more to life than just bashing each other with stones and sticks. Because coming up with something new, and having the guts to sh…

I create things all the time. (shrugs) Ain't that hard if you put more effort into the code than the soliloquy.

Doing /something/ is easy. We're talking about true innovation here, don't we? Doing something /new/ is rare. Very, very, very rare.

Re: Why the Fuck?

#460
2 brief points:

Consider the amount of human innovation dedicated to killing other humans more efficiently. Ads are an improvement.

Also, analysis techniques and technologies developed and funded with the goal of selling more ads translate to other fields, making life easier for researchers there. Just because the short term goal isn't curing cancer, that does not mean the work does not bring us closer.

Post reply on HN