agree, but in order to incentivize people to come up with "good hypotheses" we need to devalue negative results. Otherwise everyone can just suck up all the fu

agree, but in order to incentivize people to come up with "good hypotheses" we need to devalue negative results. Otherwise everyone can just suck up all the funding for total garbage hypotheses that will almost definitely end up with negative results anyway. "A mutation in the P53AIP1 has a protective effect against alzheimers" Yeah, I totally picked a random gene off wikipedia. This will probably have a negative result. So helpful.