undefined | Better HN

0 pointsTeMPOraL8y ago0 comments

> These people are throwing billions of dollars at the wrong problems.

That's your (and idlewords's) opinion, but other people may disagree. In particular, I don't understand the desire to pick on Elon's work on the Mars program, when it pushes forward an industry with huge knock-on effects that are very beneficial to society[0], while he's also one of the few people doing high-impact work in fighting climate change. Tell me that's a "wrong" problem to solve.

You mention a bunch of other problems, but the thing is, most of them are problems that should be solved by our democratic governments. Who is a SV billionaire to tell us how copyright law should work? Not to mention, some of those problems are such that those billionaires could put all their wealth into solving them and in the end have little to show for it. Take gerrymandering - this is not something you can solve by just throwing money at it; the money will get stolen by the same people who perpetuate the problem.

Also, if you want billionaires to work on problems you deem to be "right", you should encourage them instead of mocking each one that choses to do some good instead of buying a new yacht. Or, if you prefer a less consequentialist approach, let's focus on insulting all the other rich people, both within and outside of tech industry, who don't help solve social problems.

> They might even build a new Tier 1 or Tier 3 ISP as a public benefit company w/ privacy and net neutrality in its charter plus a range of services from gigabit for businesses to wireless mesh for poor areas built on consumer routers.

SpaceX is actually on its way to do that with their LEO Internet satellites program.

When I talk about "unwarranted jabs", I mean things like the whole "Irreality" chapter of the talk, which is one long mix of ad-hominems and mocking people that disagree with him. So Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are suddenly trying to cause "the collapse of representative government". OpenAI is a cult now[1]. And anti-aging is obviously meant to ensure "that our big idea men don’t expire before the world has been received the full measure of their genius".

This is stuff that I'd expect to hear from John Oliver, who's running a comedy show. Not from someone who attempts to discuss serious issues.

[0] - For starters, I'll refer you to WTFNasa, existence of GPS and the impact satellites have on global agriculture, healthcare, logistics and disease management.

[1] - his reasoning is explaioned more by his previous talk of AI; I'll leave discussing that particular talk to Scott Alexander - http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/04/01/g-k-chesterton-on-ai-ri....

0 comments

nickpsecurity8y ago

"In particular, I don't understand the desire to pick on Elon's work on the Mars program, when it pushes forward an industry with huge knock-on effects that are very beneficial to society[0]"

So does fixing housing, media, universities, medical, copyright/patent law, and so on. They'll have immediate benefit to all kinds of people on a massive level. If anything, those ripple effects will likely be superior to a Mars project even creating more Elon Musks as opportunities and capabilities increase with critical costs decreasing.

Meanwhile, as technocrati screw around like they are, the real elites that own this country continue doing the reverse of what I suggest controlling more and more doing more and more damage to the benefit of the tiniest few. Those elites are focusing on all the critical areas with wide impact. Just with perverse incentives that lead to harm. The Elon Musks should do the same with more benevolent stance to act as a balance against them plus create opportunities instead of remove them. So, far the only large, tech companies lobbying Washington and working at those levels are the most harmful or selfish ones. The rest are just rich people parasiting on a system actual elites control. Too bad as the people need benevolent elites these days.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse