zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. roxolo+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-05-21 13:20:53
The question though is what is the time horizon of “eventually”. Very different decisions should be made if it’s 1 year, 2 years, 4 years, 8 years etc. To me it seems as if everyone is making decisions which are only reasonable if the time horizon is 1 year. Maybe they are correct and we’re on the cusp. Maybe they aren’t.

Good decision making would weigh the odds of 1 vs 8 vs 16 years. This isn’t good decision making.

replies(2): >>rsynno+Q >>ecb_pe+U2
2. rsynno+Q[view] [source] 2025-05-21 13:26:59
>>roxolo+(OP)
Or _never_, honestly. Sometimes things just don't work out. See various 3d optical memory techs, which were constantly about to take over the world but never _quite_ made it to being actually useful, say.
3. ecb_pe+U2[view] [source] 2025-05-21 13:41:06
>>roxolo+(OP)
> This isn’t good decision making.

Why is doing a public test of an emerging technology not good decision making?

> Good decision making would weigh the odds of 1 vs 8 vs 16 years.

What makes you think this isn't being done?

[go to top]