We did recently find something very promising https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c39jj9vkr34o

As was discussed at the time, that news was overhyped. The finding is not strong evidence of life, it's strong evidence that we don't fully understand how that molecule gets formed. And the most recent news on that front is that the finding itself is being challenged.

Every finding gets challenged, and that challenge always becomes news. Trying to evaluate the progress of a scientific debate based on news stories is like guessing the record of a soccer team based on a couple of viral goal clips.

All the more reason why it's too early to be saying anything about that discovery.

Quantum mechanics teaches us nature isn't continuous though.

The energy levels of electrons bound to atoms/molecules are quantized, and therefore the energy levels of photons emitted/absorbed (when those electrons change energy levels) are quantized.

But as far as I understand that is just the result of constraints imposed by the atom/molecule "box". Like how a guitar string can only vibrate at certain frequencies because an integer multiple of wavelengths of the standing wave must fit on the string.

Outside of such systems, energy levels are not quantized. For example, photons from distant galaxies appear to be redshifted on a continuous spectrum.

And even within the box the energy levels can be varied continuously if, for example, you squeeze the molecule or put it in an electric field.

Come on, please keep these kind of polemics off HN...

Classic communism am I right?

Welcome to capitalism. Of course there is an asymmetry between individual founders and one of the, if not the most famous VC firm on the planet. It's an individual decision to determine whether YC is worthwhile. If it wouldn't be, it wouldn't work.

Is it still? Or was that true 10 years ago.

Not sure if I’ve changed or the landscape has.

Silicon Valley is not capitalism, it's financier-ism. It isn't about finding a gap in the market and providing a profitable service, but bandwagoning behind the latest trends so as to chase "scalability" and later using financial/political muscle to weaken regulations so as to better "disrupt" the market. Profits? That's a problem for whoever they manage to dump their shares on.

What do you think capitalism is, if not that? "Those with capital use their money to make the rules so they make more money."

Many people think capitalism is simply a market economy. It's not. You can have a market economy without "capital" (investors) having special privileges that make all the money flow to them.

That's capitalism.

Not sure why this is front page, it's way too basic for the HN crowd.

“how to center a div” has been at the top of HN more times than most can count :)

Wait didn't they just recently request researchers to pair up with them in exchange for the data?

That's a pretty low bar for a dystopia given that many countries have federalized police systems like Spain, Japan, France, Italy, ...

You named 4 countries with land sizes and populations comparable to california or texas.

This is some low level criticism. Just because some one has successful parents it takes anything away from their accomplishments? I mean, it's always nice to root for the underdogs, I do too, but this Zeitgeist has just become childish.

I wasn’t diminishing or taking away their accomplishment's, their background doesn’t change what they did or made.

What I was critiquing was the fact that a seemingly inordinate number of people who advocate that your work in software should be free for anyone else to take without payment, also happen to not ever need to consider how they put food on the table due to wealth they inherited or were given due to their celebrity status