[HN Gopher] Slow
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Slow
        
       Author : calvinfo
       Score  : 372 points
       Date   : 2025-07-31 19:00 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (michaelnotebook.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (michaelnotebook.com)
        
       | ananddtyagi wrote:
       | Nice post! This rhymes with the ideas Cal Newport presents in
       | Slow Productivity.
        
         | fuzztester wrote:
         | Next should be a series of posts on the Slow movement.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_movement_(culture)
         | 
         | Post them slowly, i.e. not all on the same day. We need time to
         | read them - slowly.
        
       | rglover wrote:
       | Kudos to the OP for writing this.
       | 
       | That PC post always irked me. Not because it showed positive
       | examples of _going fast_ but because it felt slightly demeaning
       | to teams /projects that move slowly on purpose, with intent.
        
         | MontyCarloHall wrote:
         | I disagree. The PC post never demeans projects that
         | purposefully move slowly with intent, but rather criticizes
         | boondoggles that move slowly due to utter incompetence. The
         | only pejorative text in the PC post is this:
         | 
         | >San Francisco proposed a new bus lane on Van Ness in 2001. It
         | opened in 2022, yielding a project duration of around 7,600
         | days. "The project has been delayed due to an increase of wet
         | weather since the project started," said Paul Rose, a San
         | Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency spokesperson. The
         | project cost $346 million, i.e. $110,000 per meter. The Alaska
         | Highway, mentioned above, constructed across remote tundra,
         | cost $793 per meter in 2019 dollars.
        
           | cma wrote:
           | At least 30 deaths in the construction of the Alaska highway
           | and obviously much lower eminent domain costs for remote
           | tundra vs downtown SF after the second tech boom.
           | 
           | https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/alaska-.
           | ..
        
       | tombert wrote:
       | In my free time, I have taken to trying to prove the Collatz
       | conjecture.
       | 
       | People much smarter and more educated than me have failed at this
       | quest, so I will nearly certainly fail at it, but that's not
       | really the point in my mind. Even if I'm not the one to actually
       | prove it, I can at least try and contribute to the body of work
       | _towards_ proving it. Mathematics is, more than nearly anything
       | else, the result of generations building upon previous
       | generations work. It 's never "done", always growing and refining
       | and figuring out new things to look at.
       | 
       | I have a few ideas on how to prove Collatz that I have not seen
       | done anywhere [1], and usually (at least for me) that means it's
       | a bad idea, but it's worth a try.
       | 
       | One of the greatest things about humans is our willingness to
       | have multi-generational projects. I think maybe the coolest thing
       | humans have ever done was eliminate smallpox, and that took
       | hundreds of years.
       | 
       | [1] Which I'm going to keep to myself for now because they're not
       | very fleshed out.
        
         | cubefox wrote:
         | A related thing occurs in academia for very niche topics on
         | which only very few people are working. Perhaps nobody for most
         | of the time. A paper might "reply" to another paper from years
         | or decades ago, and receive itself a reply only years later,
         | but from a different author.
         | 
         | The cool thing is that you can easily become the current world
         | leading expert on such a niche topic, because there aren't that
         | many papers. So it's easy to know every single one of them, and
         | the few experts are spread out in time rather than space.
         | 
         | It's like a web forum thread on a very obscure question, where
         | only every few years someone contributes a new comment, likely
         | never to be read by most of the previous authors, but read by
         | all that come later.
        
           | pavel_lishin wrote:
           | > _A related thing occurs in academia for very niche topics
           | on which only very few people are working. Perhaps nobody for
           | most of the time. A paper might "reply" to another paper from
           | years or decades ago, and receive itself a reply only years
           | later, but from a different author._
           | 
           | Reminds me of certain parts of "Anathem".
        
         | snarf21 wrote:
         | Reminds me of Stewart Brand and the Clock of the Long Now (and
         | other longer time horizon projects they are working on).
         | 
         | Reminds me of a statement he made during a Tim Ferris interview
         | that I think is quite profound for our mental health. "....
         | being proud is the most reliable source of happiness that I
         | know."
        
           | saulpw wrote:
           | Proud of your work, not proud of yourself. The latter is
           | quite a reliable source of unhappiness, I've found.
        
         | wwweston wrote:
         | And it's not only never done, it's always on the verge of dying
         | off. Like Bill Thurston said, mathematical understanding
         | basically lives in communities of mathematicians, every one of
         | them a cell in the superorganism that is the field. You're part
         | of the distributed filesystem providing persistence as well as
         | the possibility of new understanding.
         | 
         | https://mathoverflow.net/questions/43690/whats-a-mathematici...
        
         | 7373737373 wrote:
         | Interesting new contender for simplest to state unsolved
         | problem: The Antihydra
         | 
         | Does this program halt?                 a = 8       b = 0
         | while b != -1:           if a % 2 == 0:               b += 2
         | else:               b -= 1           a += a//2
         | 
         | (// being integer division, equivalently a binary shift one to
         | the right: >> 1)
         | 
         | https://www.sligocki.com/2024/07/06/bb-6-2-is-hard.html
         | 
         | https://bbchallenge.org/antihydra
        
           | tombert wrote:
           | Interesting, I hadn't heard this one.
           | 
           | I should see if I can model this in Isabelle or something and
           | see what happens.
        
             | 7373737373 wrote:
             | for reference, the statement has been formalized in Lean in
             | Deepmind's open problem database:
             | https://github.com/google-deepmind/formal-
             | conjectures/blob/e...
        
       | saagarjha wrote:
       | Kind of amusing to have this at the top of the front page
       | considering "Fast" was there yesterday
        
         | fuzztester wrote:
         | Next?
         | 
         | Medium.
         | 
         | Posted on Medium, ofc.
        
           | WJW wrote:
           | You know why they call it Medium, of course? Because it's
           | definitely not Rare and usually also not Well Done.
        
         | frutiger wrote:
         | I imagine the two events are correlated.
        
           | drivers99 wrote:
           | Just to add to that, it does link to
           | 
           | https://patrickcollison.com/fast (which has 300 comments from
           | 2019 on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21848860 )
           | 
           | which is different than yesterday's link to
           | https://www.catherinejue.com/fast (426 comments as of now
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44736967 )
        
       | MontyCarloHall wrote:
       | >A fun question: of these projects, which required a long time,
       | and which could have been greatly accelerated?
       | 
       | Pretty much everything on the list is a research study of a long-
       | term process that is inherently impossible to accelerate.
       | 
       | From the list, only the Second Avenue Subway and the Sagrada
       | Familia unambiguously qualify as projects that could be greatly
       | accelerated. The SAS was not under active construction for the
       | vast majority of the time between 1942 and 2017 -- actual
       | construction only happened for a couple years in the early 70s,
       | then another couple years in the late 80s, and finally from
       | 2011-2017. The fits and starts were due to a combination of
       | bureaucratic red tape, economic woes, and gross incompetence. The
       | Sagrada Familia has also seen only intermittent construction over
       | the last century, primarily because of lack of funding.
        
       | mrbananagrabber wrote:
       | I love the story of the Framingham Heart Study, it's one I've
       | referenced a lot when I talk to people and organizations about
       | how they might not have the data they need and how important data
       | collection is.
        
       | conradev wrote:
       | For open source, SQLite has pledged long term support through
       | 2050: https://www.sqlite.org/lts.html
       | 
       | I imagine it will go on for much longer, though!
        
       | brudgers wrote:
       | _The Art of Computer Programming_ has been a work in progress
       | since 1962.
       | 
       | That's longer than some of the list items.
        
         | cubefox wrote:
         | Thanks. I was going to ask about long book (or film etc)
         | projects like that. Some dictionaries and encyclopedias took
         | decades to finish. The "Deutsches Worterbuch" by the Brothers
         | Grimm was started in 1838 and it got finished only in 1961,
         | long after their death.
        
           | brudgers wrote:
           | Unlike most of the list items or a dictionary, Knuth's work
           | is an ongoing personal creative process rather than an
           | independent mechanism or a collection of data.
        
       | hermitcrab wrote:
       | Most democracies have elections every 4 or 5 years. That is good,
       | in that we can get rid of underperforming politicians and
       | parties. But it is bad, in that there isn't a lot of incentive
       | for politicians and parties to plan over a longer timescale than
       | 4 or 5 years.
       | 
       | China has the opposite problem. It can plan and finance long term
       | projects. But there is little prospect of peacefully changing the
       | leadership.
        
         | vik0 wrote:
         | Long-term planning on a colossal scale (like nation-state-
         | level) (or even on a not-so-colossal scale - think of how many
         | plans YOU have made and how they turned out) is pointless
         | because of black swans
         | 
         | Sure, having a general idea of where you want things to go is
         | fine, and everyone already does that; but when a government
         | starts thinking that they should set a concrete goal X and they
         | should do Y to achieve it, it's just akin to trying to predict
         | the future, and we all know how well that always works out,
         | because theyre under the faulty premise of thinkin Y will be
         | constant forever, or that even the goal itself (X) should
         | remain constant in a world that is anything but constant
         | 
         | So, this is a terrible argument for not having elections, or
         | bigger election cycles. I'm sure someone could potentially put
         | forward a better argument, but this one is not it
        
           | hermitcrab wrote:
           | "Plans are worthless, but planning is everything." (variously
           | attributed)
           | 
           | Definitely not advocating for "not having elections, or
           | bigger election cycles" BTW.
        
       | aaronbrethorst wrote:
       | The 2nd Ave Subway in Manhattan, with         preparatory
       | construction beginning in         1942. First phase opened in
       | 2017.
       | 
       | Although the outcome should be celebrated, the slowness and the
       | added costs that brings certainly should not be.
       | While every project is unique, it is not         immediately
       | clear why digging a subway         on the Upper East Side is
       | twenty times         more expensive than in Seoul or ten
       | times more expensive than in Paris.
       | 
       | https://marroninstitute.nyu.edu/blog/costly-lessons-from-the...
       | 
       | here's a even more damning look:
       | https://www.vitalcitynyc.org/articles/why-it-costs-4-billion...
       | 
       | edit: I've been on a tirade about this subject this week.
       | https://www.brethorsting.com/blog/2025/07/state-capacity-and...
        
         | jauntywundrkind wrote:
         | Super enjoyed this read today. And a much shorter punchline.
         | https://www.volts.wtf/p/us-transit-costs-and-how-to-tame
         | https://bsky.app/profile/volts.wtf/post/3lvbpy6p2zk2c
         | 
         | It's just so sad having a nation where disbelief & being
         | against things is so the spirit.
        
           | aaronbrethorst wrote:
           | I was really disappointed when David Roberts stopped writing
           | due to persistent hand pain, but the podcast series he's
           | turned Volts into as a result has been eye opening for me. I
           | haven't listened to this episode yet. thanks for highlighting
           | it!
        
           | persolb wrote:
           | Alon Levy being brought up on this topic always tweaks my
           | "but somebody is wrong in the internet." I've been on several
           | of the projects he talks about. He's right about the macro
           | numbers and the general vibe, but often wrong when he starts
           | talking about he details.
           | 
           | The main issues are, in general: 1) increased regulation,
           | which includes internal self-regulation. Lots of rules that
           | are preventing potential minor problems, but have a lot of
           | overhead to follow. 2) large projects are treated like a
           | Christmas Tree. Everybody expects their vaguely adjacent
           | hobby horse to be addressed by the project... so scope keeps
           | growing. There is ALWAYS something you can point to that has
           | a good cost/benefit; and always addressing these ensures that
           | the project never actually finishes. 3) lack of decision
           | making. There is a general analysis paralysis and fear of
           | making the wrong call. It's often cheaper to just move ahead
           | and risk rework. By not moving ahead, change orders are being
           | incurred anyway.
           | 
           | As much as a hate saying it, the best thing for any large
           | project in these orgs is being run by a semi-dictator who has
           | enough political capital internal to the org, and who
           | strongly objects to anything outside of scope.
        
         | wwweston wrote:
         | The "it is not immediately clear" part should be taken to heart
         | a lot more than it is. Right now I'd bet you could elect Ezra
         | Klein president and he would be as unable to improve things as
         | most, and he probably has a somewhat clearer picture of the
         | factors than your average internet commentator.
         | 
         | Railing against optimizing for caution in a vague sense really
         | isn't articulating specific dynamics however well it leans into
         | the shallow strawmanification of "regulation" that doesn't
         | merely dominate lay discourse but has essentially ascended into
         | conceptual godhood without having paid real dues in sacrifice
         | or insight.
         | 
         | There is no respectable theory of why that has even begun to
         | grasp the problem.
        
           | aaronbrethorst wrote:
           | I recommend checking out the Vital City NYC link i shared. It
           | articulates some of the "specific dynamics" you're
           | thoughtfully, if turgidly requesting.
        
             | twojacobtwo wrote:
             | Thank you for using "turgidly" as such. You've given me a
             | new appreciation for the term.
        
       | smartmic wrote:
       | This goes hand in hand with the Lindy effect[0]. Some of the
       | examples given in the article are a testament to it.
       | 
       | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect
        
         | nancyminusone wrote:
         | I am fairly certain there will be almost as many Ford model Ts
         | running around in 2108 than are running now, but within 30 or
         | 40 years I doubt there will be many cybertrucks that do.
        
           | treetalker wrote:
           | I'd forecast that most of the remaining ones would end up
           | making their way to Southern Florida but they're already
           | there.
        
       | calebm wrote:
       | I assume this is a response to:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44736967
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Thanks! Macroexpanded:
         | 
         |  _Fast_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44736967 - July
         | 2025 (417 comments)
        
         | listeria wrote:
         | From TFA
         | 
         | > _This page is a riff on Patrick Collison 's list of /fast
         | projects._
         | 
         | Maybe as a HN post, but the blog is in response to
         | https://patrickcollison.com/fast
        
       | jmkr wrote:
       | I think in the western world, Art, and music are both long term
       | projects. So much so that we seem to have "reinvented" music at
       | least twice. Once after the Greeks into classical western music,
       | then again when jazz went into tonal harmony.
       | 
       | At least parts of it are "scientific" and "directed," see the
       | Lydian Chromatic concept for example
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydian_Chromatic_Concept_of_To...
        
       | alnwlsn wrote:
       | A friend of mine once wrote a dictionary[1]. It has all the
       | (normal) one syllable words in English, defined using only other
       | one syllable words. He decided to work on it by focusing on one
       | letter per year, so A was in 1991, B was 1992, and the book was
       | finished in 2017, 26 years later.
       | 
       | It's not even a very long book - only a few hundred pages - but
       | I'm sure if I tried to do the same thing all at once, I'd
       | probably have lost interest around B or C, so I suppose it was a
       | worthwhile strategy.
       | 
       | [1] It's not online anywhere as far as I know, sorry.
        
         | autoexec wrote:
         | I question how well many of the words that come to mind could
         | be defined using only other one syllable words, but it sounds
         | like a fun project.
        
         | mateo411 wrote:
         | I bet your friend is good at Scrabble.
        
           | thom wrote:
           | Hopefully their interest expands beyond single syllable
           | words, otherwise the highest scores according to a cursory
           | search are 'zizzed' (34) and 'jazzed' (32) which are probably
           | slightly below the average for an elite player.
        
       | bee_rider wrote:
       | I dunno. I think we should separate out the stuff that
       | fundamentally has to take a long time, like the pitch experiment,
       | from stuff like Notre Dame, which just took a long time because
       | they lacked the resources to do it all at once. Like OK, it takes
       | a long time to build a big church because you need to find all
       | the right rocks or whatever. But the pitch, that's the universe
       | taking a long time to tell us something.
       | 
       | (I'm being flip for comedy/emphasis sake, of course Notre Dame is
       | pretty impressive too).
        
         | peterkos wrote:
         | I'm imagining a spectrum between "has to be slow" and
         | "needlessly slow", with a middle slider for that one razor
         | where things take as much time as you give them.
         | 
         | Intentionality is a big theme in math research (so i've heard),
         | where solving "useful" problems isn't the ideal goal. The goal
         | is to solve interesting problems, which might seem useless, but
         | along the way achieve results with much wider implications that
         | would have been impossible to discover directly. Or, how
         | inventions like toothpaste came from space travel research.
         | 
         | (rhetorically) Does an indirect result "justify" a longer,
         | slower project? Is speed an inherent property of the problem,
         | or is it only knowable once it's complete? Or both, in the
         | cases of misused funds?
        
         | tgv wrote:
         | When they started building cathedrals they knew they weren't
         | going to see it finished. They did it anyway. That's the point.
        
           | pavel_lishin wrote:
           | As I recall, Gaudi wasn't even finished with the design when
           | the construction started. He kept working at it until his
           | death.
        
         | WJW wrote:
         | I think it is part of the point for a cathedral to take several
         | generations. If you can point to a building and say "that took
         | 5 years to build and I was there for all of it!", then that's
         | great, but the building is in some way "smaller" than you. If
         | you can point to a partially constructed building and say "my
         | grandfather worked on it, my father worked on it, I'm working
         | on it and my children will work on it too", that's a building
         | that is "larger" than any one person.
         | 
         | Taking a century or more to construct anything makes that thing
         | larger than life. There's a certain sublime quality in such
         | efforts, whether they're explicitly dedicated to a god/pantheon
         | but also if they are "just" earthly like the White House
         | (technically took 178 years to construct from start to finish).
        
       | internet_points wrote:
       | If we look beyond problems that humans solve, well, evolution of
       | diverse and specialized species seems to require time (and be
       | undone by humans going fast)
        
       | lubujackson wrote:
       | I'm reminded of the famous story of (I think) the central beam in
       | a building at Oxford. The story goes something like:
       | 
       | The central beam was beginning to fail and the Oxford
       | administration knew they needed to replace it. When they went
       | around for quotes, no one could replace the beam because it was
       | 100 ft in length and sourced from an old growth tree. Such logs
       | were simply unavailable to buy. To solve the issue, the staff
       | begin to look at major renovations to the building's
       | architecture.
       | 
       | Until the Oxford groundskeeper heard about the problem. "We have
       | a replacement beam," he said.
       | 
       | The groundskeeper took the curious admins to the edge of the
       | grounds. There stood two old growth trees, over 150 feet tall.
       | 
       | "But these must be over 200 years old! When were they planted?"
       | the admins asked.
       | 
       | "The day they replaced the previous beam."
        
         | piker wrote:
         | Fantastic!
        
         | mathattack wrote:
         | I have no idea if this story is true, but it should be.
        
           | kwhitefoot wrote:
           | We should all strive to make it so.
        
           | wazoox wrote:
           | As said in Italian "si non e vero, e ben trovato".
        
         | burkaman wrote:
         | Source: https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/oak-beams-new-
         | college-ox...
        
         | urquhartfe wrote:
         | What is a "growth tree"?
        
           | MagnumOpus wrote:
           | ((Old growth) tree), not (old (growth tree)).
           | 
           | Old growth trees are trees or forests that are centuries old
           | and not recently cultures.
        
             | Timwi wrote:
             | That should have been hyphenated then.
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old-growth_forest
        
           | adamhartenz wrote:
           | Not "growth tree" but an "old growth" tree. It just means a
           | tree that was left to mature, and never cut down.
        
         | Avicebron wrote:
         | "A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade
         | they know they shall never sit" - Paraphrased from Elton
         | Trueblood
        
         | ljlolel wrote:
         | Literally what they do for Norte dame?
        
           | tim333 wrote:
           | >Rebuilding Notre-Dame's "forest" also meant selecting 1,300
           | oak trees from across France that were "as close as possible
           | to those of the 13th century", that is, "very straight and
           | very slender", according to Desmonts, with "no defects".
           | Jean-Louis Bidet, the technical director of Ateliers
           | Perrault, remembers the rush to harvest the trees in autumn
           | so the carpenters could begin squaring the green wood from
           | "dozens of truckloads" before the end of 2022.
        
         | veqq wrote:
         | This is an urban legend. The college archivist covered it:
         | http://web.archive.org/web/20020816065622/http://www.new.ox....
         | 
         | > In 1859, the JCR told the SCR that the roof in Hall needed
         | repairing, which was true.
         | 
         | > In 1862, the senior fellow was visiting College estates on
         | `progress', i.e., an annual review of College property, which
         | goes on to this day (performed by the Warden). Visiting forests
         | in Akeley and Great Horwood, Buckinghamshire (forests which the
         | College had owned since 1441), he had the largest oaks cut down
         | and used to make new beams for the ceiling.
         | 
         | > It is not the case that these oaks were kept for the express
         | purpose of replacing the Hall ceiling. It is standard woodland
         | management to grow stands of mixed broadleaf trees e.g., oaks,
         | interplanted with hazel and ash. The hazel and ash are coppiced
         | approximately every 20-25 years to yield poles. The oaks,
         | however, are left to grow on and eventally, after 150 years or
         | more, they yield large pieces for major construction work such
         | as beams, knees etc.
        
         | yegle wrote:
         | This reminds me of the US Navy's Oak forest for ship building:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Live_Oaks_Reservation
        
         | K-Wall wrote:
         | Can't wait to see this story used on some growth hacker /
         | seeking new opportunities LinkedIn post talking about planning
         | for success.
        
       | qcnguy wrote:
       | Cool list, but to be a party pooper:
       | 
       |  _> Will Unix Time or TCP /IP ever be replaced? Modified: sure._
       | 
       | UNIX time is already being replaced with a 64 bit value instead
       | of signed 32 bit. TCP/IP has already been replaced, that's QUIC
       | over IPv6 which is what my computer uses every time it connects
       | to Google.
       | 
       | I mean you can claim IPv6 is still "IP" because it shares the
       | same first two letters, but IPv6 is different enough to be easily
       | considered a different protocol.
        
         | mzajc wrote:
         | From TFA:
         | 
         | > Modified: sure.
         | 
         | Fundamentally, IPv6 and 64 bit UNIX time are modifications of
         | their predecessors. QUIC not so much, but it's still a long way
         | from replacing TCP on the web, let alone the internet.
        
           | Timwi wrote:
           | But then you could argue that UNIX time is just a
           | modification of other forms of date/time reckoning. It
           | becomes a semantic debate over what counts as a separate
           | thing, and that's not a fantastically interesting question
           | anymore.
        
         | nottorp wrote:
         | > QUIC over IPv6 which is what my computer uses every time it
         | connects to Google.
         | 
         | You don't have to adopt everything Google tells you to adopt,
         | you know...
        
         | mikestorrent wrote:
         | > TCP/IP has already been replaced
         | 
         | Only in terms of the possible, not in terms of the real.
        
       | phtrivier wrote:
       | I guess tomorow's front page top article will be called "Steady"
       | ?
        
       | Bukhmanizer wrote:
       | This reminded me of an old comic or meme about people's
       | expectations about science that went like:
       | 
       | Protester: What do we want??
       | 
       | Crowd: High quality, double blinded, N of 100000, 20 year
       | longitudinal, preregistered studies!!
       | 
       | Protester: When do we want it??
       | 
       | Crowd: Now!!!
        
       | hnthrow90348765 wrote:
       | Figuring out a good reason to colonize the solar system
       | 
       | An optimal manufacturing and logistics network for the solar
       | system
       | 
       | Inventing replicators and dispensing with capitalism
        
         | Timwi wrote:
         | Replicators won't dispense with capitalism, at least not
         | automatically. Replicators need tremendous energy which can be
         | privately controlled, plus capitalism can maintain minority
         | control over a technology like this via trade secrets etc. and
         | keep selling the technology for high prices. If you're thinking
         | that you can just use a replicator to make more replicators,
         | that's kinda like asking a 3D printer to 3D print another 3D
         | printer, or asking an LLM to just program another LLM.
         | 
         | No, we need to dispense with capitalism ourselves instead of
         | hoping for a magical technology to do it for us.
        
       | ryandrake wrote:
       | I'm reminded of the quote: "Never give up on a dream just because
       | of the time it will take to accomplish it. The time will pass
       | anyway."
        
       | baby wrote:
       | How to game HN: always write rebuttals
        
       | pavel_lishin wrote:
       | A few other proposed entries:
       | 
       | - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard_Global_Seed_Vault
       | 
       | - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_program (the twin
       | spacecraft that have since left the heliopause)
        
       | MinimalAction wrote:
       | As an academic, I fairly resonate with this message. Also notice
       | that most examples he noticed are from academia/science
       | endeavors. I see academia as probably the only place where slow
       | projects are expected and even encouraged; think of PhD students
       | working on basic science problems, often supported for 5-7 years
       | at end (of course close to minimum wage).
       | 
       | This is not to hide that all slow undertakings are good or
       | anything. Often because of inefficient executions or bureaucratic
       | hurdles, academic suffers. But, I am trying to highlight the
       | observation that how a slow and steady progress is the typical
       | modus operandi for an academic lab/group. A famous saying comes
       | to mind: Rome isn't built in a day.
        
       | jenthoven wrote:
       | Some are projects that have a changing variable over a long
       | period of time (Framingham Heart Study, E. coli long-term
       | evolution experiment) or strive to exist a long time (Clock of
       | the Long Now). I would argue that these projects -- their
       | process, data collection methods, and goals -- may have been
       | developed quickly, in a short amount of time. Their longevity is
       | proof that the original project was well established. But the
       | same could be said of the invention of the wheel, shoe, sliced
       | bread, etc
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related by content (OP says "This page is a riff on Patrick
       | Collison's list of /fast projects"):
       | 
       |  _Fast_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36605912 - July
       | 2023 (298 comments)
       | 
       |  _Fast (2019)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30872279 -
       | March 2022 (97 comments)
       | 
       |  _Fast_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21848860 - Dec
       | 2019 (291 comments)
       | 
       |  _Fast * Patrick Collison_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21355237 - Oct 2019 (5
       | comments)
       | 
       | --
       | 
       | Also related, if only by title, this from yesterday:
       | 
       |  _Fast_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44736967 - July
       | 2025 (418 comments)
        
       | wwarner wrote:
       | Regarding LIGO, if anyone finds the sensitivity of LIGO as
       | shocking as I do, here's a 2002 lecture from Kip Thorne
       | explaining how it's achieved.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGdbI24FvXQ&t=495s
       | 
       | This video is one of about 60 recorded in a year long series of
       | lectures that were delivered at Caltech early on in the project.
       | They are archived by Pau Amaro Seoane at this address
       | https://astro-gr.org/online-course-gravitational-waves/
        
       | neilk wrote:
       | I personally find these examples underwhelming. Most of them are
       | processes that require time, like the pitch drop experiment.
       | 
       | I suspect that the things in our lives that truly have value and
       | take a long time aren't easy to identify as projects. No one
       | person starts it with a clear idea of where it will end.
       | Investment in future capabilities. Knowledge gathering without
       | clear application or business model. Strengthening institutions
       | and traditions of human rights to ensure that no one group can
       | arrest history.
        
         | Timwi wrote:
         | Depending on how you draw the line, it could be argued that
         | science -- the project of uncovering the workings of the
         | universe -- is the longest-running of all. Although the word
         | "science" isn't that old and is generally associated with the
         | Age of Enlightenment, the desire to understand the world goes
         | as far back as humans can think.
        
       | zdw wrote:
       | I'd add https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centennial_Light to this
       | list.
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | _> I suspect many key open source systems (Linux, Wikipedia) will
       | still be around in 100 years._
       | 
       | Bet FORTRAN will still be around. Maybe PHP, as well.
        
       | dfabulich wrote:
       | Here's another good example of a series of slow experiments: the
       | cosmic distance ladder.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdOXS_9_P4U
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_distance_ladder
       | 
       | You can compute the distance to the moon if you know the radius
       | of the earth by looking at how long lunar eclipses take, data
       | gathered over years of observations.
       | 
       | Eratosthenes computed the radius of the earth by clever
       | trigonometry in ancient times, and Aristarchus computed that a
       | 3.5-hour lunar eclipse indicates that the moon is ~61 earth radii
       | away.
       | 
       | Once you have the distance to the moon, you can compute the size
       | of the moon by measuring how long it takes the moon to rise. It
       | takes about two minutes, and so the radius of the moon is about
       | 0.0002 of the distance to the moon.
       | 
       | By cosmic coincidence, the sun and the moon appear to be
       | approximately the same size in the sky, so the ratio of
       | radius/distance is approximately the same for the sun and the
       | moon. If you measure phases of the moon, you'll find that half
       | moon is not exactly half the time between the full moon and new
       | moon. Half moon occurs not when the moon and the sun make a right
       | angle with the earth, but when the earth and the sun make a right
       | angle with the moon.
       | 
       | You can use trigonometry to measure the difference between the
       | half-time point between new/full moon, and the actual half moon,
       | giving you an angle th. The distance to the sun is equal to the
       | distance to the moon divided by sin(th).
       | 
       | To get th exactly right, you need a very precise clock, which the
       | Greeks didn't have. It turns out to be about half an hour.
       | Aristarchus guessed 6 hours, which was off by an order of
       | magnitude, but showed an important point: that the sun was much
       | larger than the earth, which was the first indication that the
       | earth revolved around the sun. (Aristarchus' peers mostly didn't
       | believe him, not simply out of prejudice, but because the
       | constellations don't seem to distort over the course of a year;
       | they were, as we now know, greatly underestimating the distance
       | to nearby stars.)
       | 
       | Next, you can compute the _shape_ of the orbits of the planets,
       | by observing which constellations the planets fall inside on
       | which dates over the course of _centuries_. Kepler used this data
       | first to show that the planetary orbits were elliptical, and to
       | show the relative size of each orbit, but with only approximate
       | measures of the distance to the sun (like the th measurement
       | above) there 's not enough precision to compute exact distances
       | between planets.
       | 
       | So, scientists observed the duration of the transit of Venus
       | across the sun from near the north pole and the south pole,
       | relied on their knowledge of the diameter of the earth, and used
       | parallax to compute the distance to Venus, and thereby got an
       | extremely precise measurement of the earth's distance to the sun,
       | the "astronomical unit." It took _decades_ to find the right
       | dates to perform this measurement.
       | 
       | The cosmic distance ladder goes on, measuring the speed of light
       | (without radar) based on our distance to the sun and the orbit of
       | Jupiter's moon Io, using radar to measure astronomical distances
       | based on the speed of light, measuring brightness and color of
       | nearby stars to get their distance, measuring the expected
       | brightness of variable stars in nearby galaxies to get their
       | distance, which provided the data to discover redshift (Hubble's
       | law), measuring the distance to far away galaxies (and thereby
       | showing that the universe is expanding).
        
       | rangestransform wrote:
       | The SAS is a joke, putting its name on the same list as actually
       | impressive feats like the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem insults
       | everything else on the list. It's the most expensive subway line
       | worldwide per mile, ever, despite the existence of technology
       | that made tunnelling easier. Inflation adjusted, it costs more
       | per mile than hand-digging one of the PATH tubes with 1900s
       | technology [1]. Its cost and duration are almost entirely due to
       | politics and not technical and logistical challenges, including
       | the MTA political fiefdom fighting the Park Board political
       | fiefdom, make-work-program labour spending, staff paid to have
       | their thumbs up their asses in the tunnels [2], deep-bore
       | tunneling instead of cut-and-cover to avoid political fighting,
       | and MTA departments wanting their miniature fiefdom dug into the
       | ground at each station [3]. The SAS is a project that should
       | bring great shame to everyone in charge and everyone who stood
       | around in the tunnels getting paid to do nothing.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uptown_Hudson_Tubes (tunnel
       | happens to be about a mile and it cost 21 million 1905 dollars)
       | 
       | [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-
       | subway-...
       | 
       | [3] https://pedestrianobservations.com/2023/12/09/the-mta-
       | sticks...
        
       | urvader wrote:
       | The bitcoin block chain should be on this list
        
       | earthtograndma wrote:
       | The Crazy Horse Memorial has been going since the 1940s. It's
       | progressing nicely.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Horse_Memorial
        
       | russellbeattie wrote:
       | The article conflates a few different "slow" projects, rather
       | than the premise which is efforts that required decades to come
       | to fruition.
       | 
       | He mentions projects started long ago but are still ongoing, like
       | the Sagrada Familia. Then there's innovations from long ago which
       | are still being used, like Linux. Also, he includes ideas which
       | took decades to finally be implemented, like LIGO.
       | 
       | In my opinion, none of these examples are particularly good at
       | demonstrating, "What problems can human beings only solve over a
       | very long period of time?", except for Fermat's Last Theorem.
       | 
       | All technology builds on that which came before, step by step.
       | You can trace Unicode directly back to Morse Code, via various
       | steps like ASCII, Telex, Baudot Code, etc. But the original goal
       | of Morse wasn't to display emojis.
       | 
       | I'd say General Relativity _might_ be a good example, starting
       | with Newton 's efforts to quantify the forces of the real world,
       | ending with Einstein's explanation of spacetime. But again, it's
       | not as clear of a problem as Fermat's Last Theorem which was a
       | single problem that required centuries to solve.
       | 
       | AI may be a good example as well, starting with the advent of the
       | digital computer. The very first scientists who worked with them
       | like von Neumann immediately looked forward to the day of an
       | electronic brain. It's taken nearly a century so far and is still
       | underway.
        
       | frays wrote:
       | Interestingly, the post titled "Fast" made the front page
       | yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44736967
        
       | jxf wrote:
       | Long-term projects make me strangely proud to be a human (for all
       | of our faults and foibles). "A society grows great when the old
       | plant trees in whose shade they will never sit."
        
       | Votrex_278 wrote:
       | . My work aims to help create systems which support creativity
       | and discovery. Currently, my main projects are working on
       | metascience, programmable matter, and tools for thought. In the
       | past I've worked on quantum computing, open science, and
       | artificial intelligence, and there's a lot of crossover with my
       | current interests. Bio (2020).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-31 23:00 UTC)