3 ms·

People have been burned time and time again by scientists over hyping stuff in the last 10 years, then combine that with the replication failures over nearly ev

People have been burned time and time again by scientists over hyping stuff in the last 10 years, then combine that with the replication failures over nearly every single scientific field. Then look at the extreme amount of business fraud in the last 10 years with places like Theranos and FTX Hackernews is not infested with reflexive contrarians. Hackernews has healthy amounts of skepticism and doubt. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

yummypaint 4y ago
When people use the word "reflexive," they're talking about things like conflating business hype designed to attract publicity and VC capital with a press release for a major scientific paper from NIF. I don't think it's unreasonable for HN to hold itself to an understanding of these things. If you actually want to critically examine evidence then you must necessarily read the paper before posting.
- stuckinhell 4y ago
  "reflexive contrarians" in the context here was being used a perojative rhetorical trick to broadly dismiss valid doubts people have about this research.
  - yummypaint 4y ago
    What specific issue do you have with the methodology and why? What specific scientific criticism do you claim is being silenced? Merely feeling strongly about this work contributes nothing to the discussion.
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  Bodied, and deservedly so. Bringing FTX into a discussion of nuclear fusion to justify skepticism is parody-worthy.
  - stuckinhell 4y ago
    It's an example of latest in many high profile scams. If you think it's parody that's fine, but you cannot deny the public mood is souring on big promises with out big results. FTX is simply the latest in a series of media empowered EXTREMELY high profile scams. You can easily put a thousand other different high profile companies or claims in there.
concordDance 4y ago
Note that there's multiple bits of hype compounding on each other. The scientists hype it up a bit, the University PR guys do it a lot more and the popular press goes nuts. The scientists are like 10% to blame here.

yummypaint 4y ago

When people use the word "reflexive," they're talking about things like conflating business hype designed to attract publicity and VC capital with a press release for a major scientific paper from NIF. I don't think it's unreasonable for HN to hold itself to an understanding of these things. If you actually want to critically examine evidence then you must necessarily read the paper before posting.

stuckinhell 4y ago
"reflexive contrarians" in the context here was being used a perojative rhetorical trick to broadly dismiss valid doubts people have about this research.
- yummypaint 4y ago
  What specific issue do you have with the methodology and why? What specific scientific criticism do you claim is being silenced? Merely feeling strongly about this work contributes nothing to the discussion.
whimsicalism 4y ago
Bodied, and deservedly so. Bringing FTX into a discussion of nuclear fusion to justify skepticism is parody-worthy.
- stuckinhell 4y ago
  It's an example of latest in many high profile scams. If you think it's parody that's fine, but you cannot deny the public mood is souring on big promises with out big results. FTX is simply the latest in a series of media empowered EXTREMELY high profile scams. You can easily put a thousand other different high profile companies or claims in there.

concordDance 4y ago

Note that there's multiple bits of hype compounding on each other. The scientists hype it up a bit, the University PR guys do it a lot more and the popular press goes nuts. The scientists are like 10% to blame here.