3 ms·
The phys.org article just reproduces (while adding a bunch of irrelevant internal links and some advertisements) the university's press release here: https://ne
by gjm11 7y ago
The phys.org article just reproduces (while adding a bunch of irrelevant internal links and some advertisements) the university's press release here: https://news.ucr.edu/articles/2019/06/10/new-study-dramatically-narrows-search-advanced-life-universe https://news.ucr.edu/articles/2019/06/10/new-study-dramatica...
and the actual paper is here: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ab1d52 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ab1d52
phys.org: just say no.
- justfor1comment 7y agoI don't know why an organization called phys.org might need such sensationalization of mundane news. Every article including this one makes it sound like new developments have occurred in physics. When you actually read the article and apply a small helping of skepticism you realize, the world is just the way it was yesterday. phys.org is not HN worthy imho.
- pergadad 7y agoWell they too need clicks. Set the right inventive (people more likely click bait links than more sound/dry ones) and it will either go that way or lose out to another org that does. It's like sitcoms with laugh tracks. Everyone you ask hates them, but if you ask people how much they enjoyed/would rewatch/would recommend/... a certain show they consistently give higher ratings to an episode with vs without canned or study laughter.
- gjm11 7y agoIn fairness, all the sensationalization is in the original press release put out by UC Riverside; phys.org has just copied that wholesale (which is what they generally do).