Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It is an inelegant solution. It's not something you want to scale up. It's not something "right" by Kant's categorical imperative. The lesson to take from this story isn't "keep every train running, no matter how little economical sense it makes it". Such an attitude, universalized, would indeed be a disaster for the world.

No, the lesson is that when running and optimizing systems, we should not forget why are we having them in the first place. They are there for us. Our willingness to make an occasional exception to cater for another human in need, at the cost of efficiency, is what makes us human.

Think of all those tourists who regularly get injured or lost in the mountains and have to be rescued by helicopter S&R teams. From purely economical perspective, this is burning money. We should leave them to die, because the costs of fueling a chopper and risking its destruction, not to mention lives of highly-trained personnel, are great and the money could be better spent elsewhere. And yet we train S&R teams and fly the choppers, because we chose to. Ruthless economic efficiency is not the end goal.



My entire opposition to this is based on the idea that slowing an accelerating a train is grossly more inefficient in terms of pollution and fuel waste than just finding a way to get her to the next station on a transport that does not weigh as much. If I'm wrong about that I'm happy to go back to feeling nice about this.




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

Search: