Hacker News Reader

Comment by codelap | Hacker News Reader

Living is after all, the number one cause of death with 100% fatality rate.

I feel that we're living long enough now. Until we are able to get our resource abuses under control and eliminate poverty the world over, then ~75+/-10 is a reasonable expectation. And when will these studies factor in quality of life.

View on HN

Technically, life in humans is only known to have about a 93% fatality rate, although it's likely the remaining 7% will succumb in time.

Funny. But don't use the word technically, because that's factually incorrect. A bug spray need not kill every mosquito in existence to prove that it has 100% fatality rate on mosquitoes.

It depends on your model - no number of mosquitos killed can deductively prove (à la mathematical proof) that a bug spray will kill all mosquitoes.

It can at best inductively prove it - the scientific approach, or alternately do what you called '100% rate' (the hidden words there being 'so far').

Avoid use of the word "prove" in a discussion of science and scientific theories. Science can't prove theories true, it can only prove theories false. Philosopher David Hume expressed this best: “No amount of observations of white swans can allow the inference that all swans are white, but the observation of a single black swan is sufficient to refute that conclusion.”

Yes use suggests not proves

Thanks for this. Mea culpa.

Your spray had better kill 100% of the mosquitos it's sprayed on, though. And 100% of humans have been "sprayed with" life.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com