231–240 of 363 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Theranos raised $724 million using intentional deception. LK99 is an incomplete paper that someone posted to arXiv.
Theranos was sooooo hyped on HN early on, and now we know how it turned out. This feels like practically a carbon copy of that hype.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do we actually know who that is though? I thought it was pseudoanonymous. It’s a new twitter account at least.
It is pseudonymous, although the handle iris_IGB suggests she works at IGB, Institute of Gene Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences. https://genebiology.ru/
Honestly I don't see anything that would prove superconductivity in this video. If LK-99 is a type-II superconductor you should observe flux pinning i.e. you would be able to move the flake with a tweezer and it would be stuck in place as the magnetic flux lines are pinned to defects in the material. I haven't seen any details on the supposed properties of the material like the coherence length, but from the original…
[flagged]
My hot take rebuttal?
There has been no multi billion dollar investment into LK-99.
If scientists around the world took to Twitter and all tested and sought to disproved Theranos's claim all at once BEFORE Theranos became a juggernaut of fraud, I think there would be a more apt comparison.
To history's credit there were a few scientist who stood up and said that Theranos's claim was not possible.
So far the there is a lot of hype and social media energy, but not the same levels of fraud and deception going on here. If anything the science has started to point towards the likelihood there may be something to the claims in the original LK-99 papers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Theranos raised $724 million using intentional deception. LK99 is an incomplete paper that someone posted to arXiv.
My comment had nothing to do about the money that Theranos raised, but about how the hype feels. Theranos was sooooo hyped on HN early on, and now we know how it turned out. This feels like practically a carbon copy of that hype.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Simple, there's lots of mentally ill people on this planet. Anime profile pictures are usualy a redflag. These kind of people should only be ignored since they never want to cooperate.
> Anime profile pictures are usualy a redflag. These kind of people should only be ignored since they never want to cooperate. A lot of them are simply trans and tired of dealing with constant harassment campaigns directed towards their gender identity. Of course they're wary about cooperations with people they don't intimately trust.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Anime profile pictures are usualy a redflag. These kind of people should only be ignored since they never want to cooperate. A lot of them are simply trans and tired of dealing with constant harassment campaigns directed towards their gender identity. Of course they're wary about cooperations with people they don't intimately trust.
There would have to be a lot of cognitive dissonance to be illegally trans yet self identity as "ethnically soviet" on a social media bio.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're joking, I'd 100% assume it, except that I ran into some truly bizarre US patriotism while trying to follow McCalip's updates a few days ago - last relevant one I could find was 'materials coming tomorrow' on 27th, but then I couldn't find anything about using them or any update. Just a decent into people tweeting (in thread) about how great America is, the best country, etc. Really surreal. Think it wa…
He’s replicating a cutting edge material science in his garage. People are celebrating the optimistic spirit of Americans. The indomitable will that this country encourages and the sense that anything is possible if you’re ambitious and smart enough to pull it off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is simply what post-peer-review looks like. Instead of a few anonymous peer reviews, you get the entire planet to replicate. Moment you get something meaningful, publish it on arxiv. Quantity, not quality is king. Anomalies are drowned out by large samples. Questionable methods get mass debated in public. Scientists are dependent on public funding, why squander the biggest moment in pop science for literal decad…
> Questionable methods get mass debated in public. By people who don't know what they're talking about. You're seriously underestimating the level of expertise that it takes to professionally assess most research. It wouldn't be unusual for there to be a small handful of people with that ability in the world.
Does it mean that grant money are distributed by people who are unable to "assess most research"?