Hacker News Reader

Comment by bryans | Hacker News Reader

It's ironic to be declaring the GP as dismissive while you're flippantly dismissing the work of everyone involved with F@H. You're conveniently ignoring the incentive of expanding our understanding of biology, which has very real applications and results[1] that benefit the entire world for the rest of human existence, instead of benefiting a single participant in the short term.

[1] https://www.hpcwire.com/2020/10/14/how-foldinghome-identifie...

View on HN

What? I'm not dismissing their work.

I'm just saying there is no direct financial incentive for 32 million GPUs to move over to it. If there was, they'd be on that instead of ETH.

You literally said "no incentive [...] other than good feelings." Regardless, even adding the words "direct financial" is still incorrect. For one of many examples, insurance companies investing in F@H infrastructure would be beneficiaries, albeit via savings and not revenue.

I literally clarified my statement since you came to an incorrect conclusion.

"direct financial" is correct when you're giving examples that are not direct.

You're moving the goal posts, on top of changing the definition of "direct" to fit your false narrative. First you claim there was no incentive at all, then there was no "direct" incentive, and now direct apparently means "immediate" instead of linear.

If a company invests in research specifically because the fruits of that research will reduce expenses, that is direct financial benefit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com