Daves_not_h3r3_man t1_iv6tc8f wrote
50 years later we discover these coatings are in the air and water in the bloodstream of most animals...
einarfridgeirs t1_iv7a96h wrote
Why is it that every single halfway positive post in this sub instantly attracts a dozen or more top replies where people dream of every single reason why it wont work or turn out to be somehow horrible?
Where did our wonder and enthusiasm for scientific problem solving go?
Is the "doomer" generation really that wedded to the idea the future must be miserable?
chupo99 t1_iv7docm wrote
Because most of these "successful" scientific results never see the light of day in actual products. They're just novel lab discoveries. Great that they're being done. But doesn't mean anything in terms of changing the future.
15pH t1_iv7qn5o wrote
Every new tech that will radically change the future starts as a "novel lab discovery." Sure, most of the discoveries don't lead to much, but that doesn't mean we should see the glass as entirely empty and shrug our shoulders at everything. It is healthy and useful to be excited by new science and new possibilities.
Also, I think it is important to separate the impact of discoveries in physical sciences vs medical science. Medical "discoveries" are often in controlled petri dishes, and turn out to not be effective in a whole human where many complex complex systems interfere. It is usually appropriate to be pessimistic toward these over-hyped in vitro medical "discoveries."
On the other hand, a physical discovery or product like this one is fully REAL. The hurdles to making it "useful" are usually manufacturing and cost, which are only limited by current technology. We can innovate such things into existence in ways we cannot do with medicine. Thus, I think it is appropriate to be excited by physical discoveries and have them inspire wonder and innovation.
iama_bad_person t1_iv7lzen wrote
99% of all posts in this sub
gawake t1_iv8jqdu wrote
Not every inch of progress will revolutionize our world. It’s your expectations you should re-evaluate.
Daves_not_h3r3_man t1_iv7agfe wrote
No, I'm almost 50. I've been around enough to understand a very simple phrase.
Unintended consequences.
It's really not that complicated
Daves_not_h3r3_man t1_iv7bc3f wrote
And more specifically, people seem to want a quick fix. We are talking about very complicated topics ones that affect far more than just humanity which, unfortunately most people seem unwilling to tackle.
To reiterate, there's more to life than people. Until we can have a more holistic view of what life actually is, all of these things are temporary Band-Aids.
15pH t1_iv7mp9c wrote
We must always consider new tech risks in the context of the benefits. How useful is this new technology vs how likely and severe are the risks? It is wise to be concerned about potential risks, but we cannot ignore the known benefits.
Also, we should not fear unintended consequences based on a decades-old perspective. Over the last 40 years especially, the world has shifted from mostly ignoring the environment to having national and international regulations and watchdogs to address unintended consequences and new pollutants.
Of course, the regulations and watchdogs are still mostly weak and we still must be watchful, but it is time to evolve our default assumption from "no one has considered the unintended consequences" to "experts are testing and considering the materials and processes used."
unassumingdink t1_iv8609o wrote
> ver the last 40 years especially, the world has shifted from mostly ignoring the environment to having national and international regulations and watchdogs
Who are all some version of powerless, intentionally underfunded, or only able to levy fines representing a fraction of the money made from reckless activity.
LeRawxWiz t1_iv80ofd wrote
Because we really can't address these issues in good faith until Capitalism is abolished. We've seen this shit for decades.
Capitalism is anti-scientific method and anti-human. We need radical change, not just well-wishes and bandaids when the solution requires surgery.
Popswizz t1_iv73fhr wrote
Honestly, we might be at a point short term (under 1000 years old) trade off from biological problems are necessary to offset the millions years old problem that is climate warming through fossil fuel consumption
ten-million t1_iv79489 wrote
You just made that up. Nice!
Daves_not_h3r3_man t1_iv79upa wrote
I did lol...maybe with science getting so good, we can make this discovery in 25...
ten-million t1_iv7geea wrote
Lol. America is going to shit. If you don’t know, make shit up! Lol
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments