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

Maybe he should have closed one eye, but the first atomic bomb only explodes once. Your body won't last forever no matter how well you care for it (as Feynman well knew, having just watched his wife Arline die slowly of incurable tuberculosis); seeing the first atomic-bomb test with your own eyes seems eminently worth the risk of blindness, or even sacrificing an eye.


I really can't agree. I would not exchange my eyesight for the whole world, literally. Therefore the qudos of having looked at a novel explosion in no way compensates for any risk to my eyes.


>I would not exchange my eyesight for the whole world, literally.

FYI vacuum exposure can cause blindness, visual impairment, and death.


[flagged]


Downvoted not because I’m afraid of my own mortality, but because pointing out the obvious fact that nobody can see after they die is neither insightful nor useful. Go tell that to someone who has become blind and let me know how much consolation that provides them.


Even if I knew was going to die tomorrow, I will not exchange my remaining eyesight for qudos. I would prefer to spend my last day looking at my family, the trees, the running water, the flowers. It seems totally uncontroversial to me, I'm really surprised to find someone who disagrees.


I thought the next few decaces was a climate change reference.


Sorry, no, I just meant that the maximum human lifespan recorded so far is 12.2 decades, and the vast majority of people reading this will die in even less, 2–5 decades, regardless of what happens with climate change. Given that, it's silly to treat your body as if you could make it last forever.

I've edited my comment above to clarify.


I think people understand the nihilistic viewpoint but it makes no sense to sacrifice your health while you still have it.




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

Search: