Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Continuing with the hypothetical, the species that will disappear would have prevented a global pandemic that wipes out all of humanity.

You've just changed the hypothesis in order to ridicule it. Playing a different game and saying "see? I won" is worthless. If you had stated that previously, I'm sure effectively everyone in the world would have agreed that a year's global output would be worth saving it - it also saves them.

Without that part of the hypothesis, there's the vanishingly-small chance that this could actually happen. As it could happen, it should be factored into any of the replies... but at what probability? Certainly not 100%. And as we are not yet extinct, but have been around for / caused the extinction of thousands of species...

Not that it can't happen, just that it would be an exceptionally unlikely occurrence, and should be treated as such. It's entirely possible that, on your next inhale, you'll die. Will you hold your breath until you die to prevent it?




> You've just changed the hypothesis in order to ridicule it.

No, what I did was demonstrate my point. It doesn't appear you understood so I'll be as clear as possible: accurate value is impossible to determine as it requires perfect knowledge, itself impossible to obtain. Although far fetched, the progression of the hypothetical is nothing more than a demonstration of the lack of perfect knowledge.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: