6 ms·

Removing something critical and seeing what happens is a methodology used by Musk in all his companies: remove LIDAR from self driving car, remove flame trench

Removing something critical and seeing what happens is a methodology used by Musk in all his companies: remove LIDAR from self driving car, remove flame trench from spaceship launch pad, etc. Results may vary.

andrewflnr 2y ago
"Results may vary" is not an acceptable methodology for the US Government, when millions of lives are potentially at stake. Ed: among the ways millions of lives could be lost: losing control of our nuclear arsenal or nuclear materials due to haphazardly firing people responsible for maintaining them. Bungling the response to the next pandemic, due to haphazardly firing people, cutting science funding and deleting inconvenient data. Starvation and disease from ceasing aid around the world. There's also the wars likely to result from the collapse of trust in the US as a security partner, but I suppose it's not correct to blame that on DOGE per se, even if it's an extension of the same principle.
- knightfall21 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - jounker 2y ago
    My friend is a doctor. Her profession uses sections of the NIH and CDC websites on a daily basis. They are the references for drug interactions with medical conditions. These sections are just gone. Trump’s “cost saving” measures are already actively harming medical treatment in the USA.
    - cbracketdash 2y ago
      I'm sure the NIH isn't the only entity with access to pharmacology information...
      - jtgeibel 2y ago
        I doubt adding paywalls and more 3rd parties will help reverse the trend of rising healthcare costs. But also, just why? Why not keep this information that our tax dollars have already paid for in the public domain? I thought we were supposed to care about efficiency and that information wanted to be free.
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  This seems circular, since your opinion, views, thoughts, etc., are what the opposing factions are rejecting ( or de-legitimizing) in the first place.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    People disagree with my opinion, therefore it's circular? Interesting logic.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      Did you read the remainder of the comment? It seems pretty clear to me at least why it would lead to circular arguments.
      - andrewflnr 2y ago
        At this point, I've presented a handful of fairly straightforward hypotheses about cause and effect. They could be wrong, but it's on you to show that they're actually self-referential. There is no amount or kind of other people's opinions that will make them so.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Your opinions do not automatically turn into credible “hypotheses”…? There is no such mechanism. If there was then the vast majority of political debates on HN wouldn’t even exist.
        andrewflnr 2y ago
        Who said a hypothesis is automatically credible? Not me.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        If they’re not credible… then why would any one care…? Readers are just going to assume it’s random noise, or at least indistinguishable from noise, from a rando on the internet.
- nuancebydefault 2y ago
  Sometimes people (e.g. US voters) will only learn by running into a wall. How all exactly will turn out is hard to tell and frankly maybe we better don't know. I'm tending to the conclusion there's no way around the movement of the big picture, the shifting of geo-political order in the world.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    Certainly, global trust in the US is already gone. That's locked in for the foreseeable future.
- elcritch 2y ago
  > Bungling the response to the next pandemic, due to haphazardly firing people, cutting science funding and deleting inconvenient data. That’s possible, however, it’s possible it’ll give a chance to remove autocrats who have suppressed the scientific method in favor of their prevailing opinions or preferences. There will be a painful period but it could rejuvenate the systems.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    But consider, what if we rejuvenated our health infrastructure in a way that isn't blazingly incompetent? Suppose you learned enough about the systems currently being smashed to specifically fire the "autocrats" and leave the competent people? Are you seeing where the importance of detail comes in?

andrewflnr 2y ago

"Results may vary" is not an acceptable methodology for the US Government, when millions of lives are potentially at stake. Ed: among the ways millions of lives could be lost: losing control of our nuclear arsenal or nuclear materials due to haphazardly firing people responsible for maintaining them. Bungling the response to the next pandemic, due to haphazardly firing people, cutting science funding and deleting inconvenient data. Starvation and disease from ceasing aid around the world. There's also the wars likely to result from the collapse of trust in the US as a security partner, but I suppose it's not correct to blame that on DOGE per se, even if it's an extension of the same principle.

knightfall21 2y ago
[flagged]
- jounker 2y ago
  My friend is a doctor. Her profession uses sections of the NIH and CDC websites on a daily basis. They are the references for drug interactions with medical conditions. These sections are just gone. Trump’s “cost saving” measures are already actively harming medical treatment in the USA.
  - cbracketdash 2y ago
    I'm sure the NIH isn't the only entity with access to pharmacology information...
    - jtgeibel 2y ago
      I doubt adding paywalls and more 3rd parties will help reverse the trend of rising healthcare costs. But also, just why? Why not keep this information that our tax dollars have already paid for in the public domain? I thought we were supposed to care about efficiency and that information wanted to be free.
MichaelZuo 2y ago
This seems circular, since your opinion, views, thoughts, etc., are what the opposing factions are rejecting ( or de-legitimizing) in the first place.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  People disagree with my opinion, therefore it's circular? Interesting logic.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    Did you read the remainder of the comment? It seems pretty clear to me at least why it would lead to circular arguments.
    - andrewflnr 2y ago
      At this point, I've presented a handful of fairly straightforward hypotheses about cause and effect. They could be wrong, but it's on you to show that they're actually self-referential. There is no amount or kind of other people's opinions that will make them so.
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Your opinions do not automatically turn into credible “hypotheses”…? There is no such mechanism. If there was then the vast majority of political debates on HN wouldn’t even exist.
        andrewflnr 2y ago
        Who said a hypothesis is automatically credible? Not me.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        If they’re not credible… then why would any one care…? Readers are just going to assume it’s random noise, or at least indistinguishable from noise, from a rando on the internet.
nuancebydefault 2y ago
Sometimes people (e.g. US voters) will only learn by running into a wall. How all exactly will turn out is hard to tell and frankly maybe we better don't know. I'm tending to the conclusion there's no way around the movement of the big picture, the shifting of geo-political order in the world.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  Certainly, global trust in the US is already gone. That's locked in for the foreseeable future.
elcritch 2y ago
> Bungling the response to the next pandemic, due to haphazardly firing people, cutting science funding and deleting inconvenient data. That’s possible, however, it’s possible it’ll give a chance to remove autocrats who have suppressed the scientific method in favor of their prevailing opinions or preferences. There will be a painful period but it could rejuvenate the systems.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  But consider, what if we rejuvenated our health infrastructure in a way that isn't blazingly incompetent? Suppose you learned enough about the systems currently being smashed to specifically fire the "autocrats" and leave the competent people? Are you seeing where the importance of detail comes in?