>Sometimes I think scientists fall for the same simplistic patterns of thinking that the men on the street fall for every day. Practising scientists are loath

>Sometimes I think scientists fall for the same simplistic patterns of thinking that the men on the street fall for every day. Practising scientists are loath to speculate without good evidence; it lays them open to criticism by peers, and damages their credibility with reviewers. Unfortunately this means that there is often a lot of inertia that slows the change of focus and means that there is some waste as the wrong work gets done (work that is known to be irrelevant by most of the community, but passes review). On the other hand this reticence does mean that there is less flailing around and hype than you see in other areas - such as business IT fads (Big Data, ML, AI, Serverless, Microservices...)