Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#51

Post by smcl »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #25
moralestapia wrote: post #8

All of this is just noise. The experiment has to be reproduced and measured by others. Then we will know.

indeed. this is Satoshi/Wright all over again. All Wright had to do is sign a document with the original key to provide (reasonably) plausible proof that he was indeed Satoshi. Behavior of grifters always has this constant: infuriate your peers by making excuses and dazzle the outsiders/media with techno-babble. Sit back and watch both camps fight in social media, from where it infects MSM. Once it takes off the 2 ca…

In Wright's case what's funnier is that after his little trickery in his attempts to prove he's Satoshi (which fell to bits immediately), he was willing to go to extraordinary lengths to keep up the act. He came up with some Back To The Future style excuse for not being in possession of certain keys saying that he'd somehow split them into N parts and had arranged for some bonded courier to show up at a given day (which obviously didn't happen). Additionally he fought against the estate of a former business partner, persuaded the judge that he was Satoshi and therefore worth billions and owes the estate $100m in damages:

> Following a three-week trial in late 2021, a jury found Wright liable for conversion but awarded Kleiman's estate US$100 million in damages while Kleiman's estate had sought upwards of US$25 billion at trial. Wright took the position that verdict served as a vindication of his role in inventing bitcoin and stated that he would not appeal the jury's findings

Really childish stuff.

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#52

Post by 7373737373 »

wslh wrote: post #11
luca_null wrote: post #3

I can't believe that the most important discovery of my lifetime is surrounded by this cloud of uncertainty. At the same time, having watched Oppenheimer recently, when humanity discovered how to split the atom was chaotic too and met with a lot of scepticism. I guess that's how we work as humans.

> I can't believe that the most important discovery of my lifetime is surrounded by this cloud of uncertainty. This is because you are a witness and obviously past discoveries are read in books just as a facts. Even when there is a story, the story doesn't have the "resolution" to mimic every hour, day, weeks, etc of the event. And in such great events, even if they don't work but the people involved think they work,…

I guess that's why stories are so important - they contain this information - how and why things happen(ed), instead of just what happened and when

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#53

Post by michaelt »

c7b wrote: post #28
luca_null wrote: post #3

I can't believe that the most important discovery of my lifetime is surrounded by this cloud of uncertainty. At the same time, having watched Oppenheimer recently, when humanity discovered how to split the atom was chaotic too and met with a lot of scepticism. I guess that's how we work as humans.

> I can't believe that the most important discovery of my lifetime is surrounded by this cloud of uncertainty. I don't get it, what else would you expect? Any claimed scientific breakthrough should generally be met with a healthy dose of skepticism at first . Competition between multiple or overlapping groups working on the same problem is common, and that alone will often result in some not-so-pretty scenes. Look up…

> I don't get it, what else would you expect? Any claimed scientific breakthrough should generally be met with a healthy dose of skepticism at first.

Well, I've heard the name LK-99 is from the initials of discoverers Lee and JH Kim, and the year of discovery (1999).

So I don't buy that they were under great time pressure due to fear of getting scooped. Surely they'd have mountains of samples if they've been making it for 24 years?

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#54

Post by jdiff »

smithcoin wrote: post #41
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual twitch content here: https://www.twitch.tv/andrewmccalip Twitter is members-only, a private site. Better to post the primary, public, source.

[flagged]

What's the point of this pedantry? Self satisfaction?

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#55

Post by wombatpm »

luca_null wrote: post #3

I can't believe that the most important discovery of my lifetime is surrounded by this cloud of uncertainty. At the same time, having watched Oppenheimer recently, when humanity discovered how to split the atom was chaotic too and met with a lot of scepticism. I guess that's how we work as humans.

I was in grad school when Pons and Fleischmann published their paper on Cold Fusion. It was exciting and anyone with a lab was trying to confirm or disprove their results. I’m getting similar vibes here.

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#56

Post by juujian »

ncallaway wrote: post #50
juujian wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst about it is how much of other people's time their wasting. Other folks are trying to verify/disprove their claims. Of course it is some kind of measurement error. Do your due diligence before you claim that you broke physics as we know it. All these people could be spending their time working on something worthwhile...

> Do your due diligence before you claim that you broke physics as we know it Do room temperature semi conductors break physics as we know it? I didn’t think they contradicted known physics, which is why so many people were researching them. What known physics do they break?

It doesn't break physics as we theorize it, but physics as we practice it. If someone found a working room temp and pressure, within a few years it would be used in labs around the world. Which is why the superconductor claim is such a big deal.

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#57

Post by juujian »

greggsy wrote: post #45
juujian wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst about it is how much of other people's time their wasting. Other folks are trying to verify/disprove their claims. Of course it is some kind of measurement error. Do your due diligence before you claim that you broke physics as we know it. All these people could be spending their time working on something worthwhile...

Their tests aren’t wasted. Negative validation adds to the corpus.

They're wasted because it becomes this game where one side claims the other side didn't do it right, and the other side claims it's not described in sufficient detail, it takes years to actually disprove something if the other side is persistent. It's not a one and done, it's a huge time sink that drains energy from researchers. You try to replicate something, you fail, that's not a publication, that's just nothing. For a phd student in a lab, that can derail your career plans if you it breaks the timeline of working toward your thesis. It's hugely damaging on an individual level. Not to mention the frustration and cynicism that comes with spending months to work, spending tens of thousands of dollars, on some bullshit that someone made up. Nobody learned or gained anything really from the Schön scandal[^1]. It just sucks all around. Not to mention it ups the pressure on scientists when fakes build a publication record, leading to a vicious cycle where the pressure makes it more likely that folks bend the truth a little bit.

[^1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#58

Post by ncallaway »

juujian wrote: post #56
ncallaway wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do your due diligence before you claim that you broke physics as we know it Do room temperature semi conductors break physics as we know it? I didn’t think they contradicted known physics, which is why so many people were researching them. What known physics do they break?

It doesn't break physics as we theorize it, but physics as we practice it. If someone found a working room temp and pressure, within a few years it would be used in labs around the world. Which is why the superconductor claim is such a big deal.

That’s… fair, but strikes me as a quite different claim.

“Breaks physics as we know it” seems very much to imply “perpetual motion machine” sorts of claim, that violate pretty strongly held physical laws.

Anyway, this is more a minor quibble with the specific language, rather than a broader disagreement, but just a heads up that to me (and I’m guessing many others), that specific phrase holds a far broader connotation than it seems you intended.

Re: “We are not cheating” (YH Kwon superconductor comments)

#60

Post by unnouinceput »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #44
unnouinceput wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>in spite of Stalin having a similar body count Not even close. In the XX century Mao leads generously, followed by Stalin and Hitler is the distant 3rd.

That # depends on if you count eastern front WWII casualties (& related civilian deaths via famine etc) in the total, and if you consider them Hitler or Stalin's "fault."

You do know that Stalin lived after 2nd WW almost a decade, yes? And you do know that the entire Eastern Europe was under the heavy boot of red plague, yes? Do you think that "oh, after WW2 Stalin never caused any more deaths, purges, famine, and became such a good boy"?

I suggest you read about communist plagues caused by his regime after WW2, not just before or during.

Post reply on HN