I'm pretty sure if they had gone with curing all the world's cavities I would have heard of them. The brand recognition alone would be worth more than a probiotic mouth wash company.

Very unlikely there was a miracle cure that was left on the table because founders wanted to sell mouthwash.

This is an obvious scam

Is it plausible a company would choose to sell mouth wash instead and that the cure would remain undeveloped for 20 years?

A hacker doesn't even know what the information is before the attack and is likely an adversary who will use any information to damage, regardless of public interest.

The other piece was combining many different levers: social support, replacement activities, rewards, motivation statements etc. You need as many tools as possible because addiction is tough.

For more on this type of approach check out the book Change Anything... Helped me more than any other source.

A key idea they discuss are "critical moments" - ie that time when you're buying the 12 pack. You need to figure out when and why that happens and design a plan to address it.

You can dismiss freedom from mass rape, arbitrary execution, tyranny and the rights to dignity and self-determination as "some principles"– but without these principles there is no world that is worth saving.

If true, free speech is not applicable. Blocking the walkie-talkies of terrorists coordinating a bombing does not restrict "free speech" under any reasonable definition.

This level of tactical coordination to commit violence appears to be what they are hinting at in their post, and I take them at their word .

It may be they are lying and caved to pressure in regards to KF being generally heinous, but until we find out the specific information that caused them to assess an imminent threat to life, we can't really judge the wisdom of their decision.

The problem here is that network effects and economies of scale generally make centralization more practical. Capitalism's competition between multiple centrally managed models, although not perfect, is tough to beat.

"Rather than lay out a concrete plan for a deprivatized internet, Tarnoff explains that experimentation will be key."

It's tough to clap your hands and summon a decentralized system, but Jacobin maintains typical faith something never tried will work well, as long as it's anti-capitalist.

Seems like regulation within capitalism is a much more dependable way of addressing flaws in the free market.

Capitalist countries, such as the US and western Europe, have had an outsized contribution to scientific endeavor, winning more than their share of Nobel prizes.

This is probably because investment in scientific research depends on a level of material prosperity that wasn't achieved in the USSR and communist China. Centrally planned economies tend to be so corrupt that researchers may have bigger issues to navigate than "publish or perish."

Jacobin takes a reasonable point (marketization can have a corrupting influence), dials up the stakes hyperbolically ("a new dark age!"), and pins it on its favorite bogeyman – "capitalism" – an amorphous, nefarious scourge (it's not clear what level of socialism we need to adopt to avert the new dark ages.)

Seems like a more reasonable take would just be to increase public funding to scientific research.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28663075

Points: 155

# Comments: 109