4 ms·
There were also others who were making pointed and substantive critiques of Theranos on HN many months before any of these stories broke. Edit: Some examples:
by kevinskii 11y ago
There were also others who were making pointed and substantive critiques of Theranos on HN many months before any of these stories broke.
Edit: Some examples:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8182026 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8182026
- Crito 11y agoThis is true. There were in fact people voicing their suspicion that Theranos was all a crock of shit in the very first discussions on Theranos on HN. Warning signs were there. People were voicing specific technical concerns, as well as less specific concerns over the technical expertise of those involved. For the most part, these critics were brushed off. HN's voting system did not promote their comments; rather it promoted the apologetics.
- notacoward 11y agoRandom thought: maybe "gratuitous positivity" is as damaging as "gratuitous negativity" and should be treated the same way. Only seems fair, doesn't it?
- dredmorbius 11y agoThere's an alternative philosophy to consider, stoicism: http://aeon.co/magazine/philosophy/why-stoicism-is-one-of-the-best-mind-hacks-ever/ http://aeon.co/magazine/philosophy/why-stoicism-is-one-of-th...
- jonesb6 11y agoI knew there was a word that described my attitude towards tech journalism.