8 ms·

Well, if the last few years have taught us anything, it is that cynicism is always warranted. Basically, the very big and undeniable shit hits you, immediately

Well, if the last few years have taught us anything, it is that cynicism is always warranted. Basically, the very big and undeniable shit hits you, immediately, right now, with regularity, while the hypothetical bits of maybe good news always are touted as breakthrough even though they will just be "for some times later". Also, if I read the few cheerful comments correctly, this type of fusion basically means that ITER is a waste of time (so the lesson is, even in science, "internationnal cooperation ? shmooperation".) Also, it's depressing to know that I'm too dumb to really help in any of the good fights, but that I'm constantly contributing to the shit. So, yeah, kudos to the researchers, let them keep up the good work, but, maybe, only call it a "breakthrough" and have the press conference when it lights a bulb somewhere ?)

whimsicalism 4y ago
What? Why have the past few years taught you that at all?
- phtrivier 4y ago
  I don't know. Maybe the pandemic that we completely failed to handle ? The "breakthrough" vaccines / meds that kinda help but don't solve the issues as much as "we got lucky at the mutation lottery this time, but wait until millions of Chinese breed the next variant" ? The war in Europe that was "never supposed to happen anymore because it would be insane because trade etc..." and yet... just does ? The energy crisis that will be "solved" by piling coal on top of not reducing emissions ? The fires and floods that can't be dealt with because it would be "catering to liberal propaganda ?" Social media burning the minds of a generation, including the mind of the one guy that was kinda inspirational once in a while, but is now going the full "James bond vilain" road ? Now, don't get me wrong, none of this is "new", "unprecedented", "the end of the world", etc... All of this shall pass, and in the long run, somewhere in the distant future, the small steps will accumulate to create a vague form of "good news". Someday, an actual fusion reactor will be ready to light a bulb. And then... ...then, you'll get protests and FUDs and corruption and NIMBYism to make sure the plant opens somewhere else.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    Humans are biased towards remembering bad events and thinking things are worse than before. I would suggest reflecting on that, I do not think the things you are naming are unique. mRNA vaccines were absolutely a breakthrough therapy.
    - phtrivier 4y ago
      > I would suggest reflecting on that, I do not think the things you are naming are unique. Oh I wholeheartedly agree that it's neither unique, nor new, nor the first or last times we fucked things up. My pronouns are pessimistic/stoic/sleepy. > mRNA vaccines were absolutely a breakthrough therapy. ...a "breakthrough" that was incorrectly touted a fix for the pandemic, that would also be used to cure all disease, etc... (Again, not by the researchers themselves, but by pretty much everyone else.) In the end, it definitely bought time for the elderly (and unhealthy), until Omicron actually changed the game. If we had not got this particular mutation "winning ticket", given the disappointing efficiency of mRNA vaccines on infection and transmission, I'm unfortunately convinced that we would still have to show proof of a recent vaccination to get a coffee. (And since I'm in a particularly bad mood, let's not talk about the long term societal effects of mandates and restrictions and penalization of "not blindly trusting your government", which will reveberate.) At least, we learnt that "maaaaybe it's worth testing our medecines on the half of humanity that has a functioning uterus" [1], which is a "breakthrough discovery" that almost arrived _after_ nuclear fusion. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/vaccine-trials-should-monitor-menstrual-changes-researchers-say-rcna57520 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/vaccine-trials-...
- dylan604 4y ago
  There have been lots of press releases from universities looking to capitalize on the research done under their "leadership". Never mind that research is usually financed by grants and similar methods. So many of these announcements claim to be stupendous achievements, and they very well may be, but they tend to come with no real way of achieving commercial success. It's not necessarily the fault of the researchers and they did what they set out to do. It's the marketing teams that make it sickening to the point we've all become calloused to this kind of science spam. Does ignition fall into the same category? We'll see
throwaway4aday 4y ago
> Basically, the very big and undeniable shit hits you, immediately, right now, with regularity, while the hypothetical bits of maybe good news always are touted as breakthrough even though they will just be "for some times later". This just seems like an argument against transparency in research which I think is the wrong direction to take things since it's more helpful to the overall direction of research to publish incremental results so others can build on them sooner. You may be misconstruing the reporting of small, incremental steps as something akin to crying wolf when really you're just seeing all the hard work that goes into solving big problems that eventually produces "very big undeniable shit". It's all part of the same thing, small steps move you towards a big goal, it's hard to get as excited about them as it is about the final product but you can't have the latter without the former.
- phtrivier 4y ago
  > This just seems like an argument against transparency in research. Sorry if that sounded this way. As I said, "kudos to the researchers". They probably have good reasons to be happy, and we can cheer them for that - but the expections for the word "breakthrough" to be used for the layman are not met, sorry.

whimsicalism 4y ago

What? Why have the past few years taught you that at all?

phtrivier 4y ago
I don't know. Maybe the pandemic that we completely failed to handle ? The "breakthrough" vaccines / meds that kinda help but don't solve the issues as much as "we got lucky at the mutation lottery this time, but wait until millions of Chinese breed the next variant" ? The war in Europe that was "never supposed to happen anymore because it would be insane because trade etc..." and yet... just does ? The energy crisis that will be "solved" by piling coal on top of not reducing emissions ? The fires and floods that can't be dealt with because it would be "catering to liberal propaganda ?" Social media burning the minds of a generation, including the mind of the one guy that was kinda inspirational once in a while, but is now going the full "James bond vilain" road ? Now, don't get me wrong, none of this is "new", "unprecedented", "the end of the world", etc... All of this shall pass, and in the long run, somewhere in the distant future, the small steps will accumulate to create a vague form of "good news". Someday, an actual fusion reactor will be ready to light a bulb. And then... ...then, you'll get protests and FUDs and corruption and NIMBYism to make sure the plant opens somewhere else.
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  Humans are biased towards remembering bad events and thinking things are worse than before. I would suggest reflecting on that, I do not think the things you are naming are unique. mRNA vaccines were absolutely a breakthrough therapy.
  - phtrivier 4y ago
    > I would suggest reflecting on that, I do not think the things you are naming are unique. Oh I wholeheartedly agree that it's neither unique, nor new, nor the first or last times we fucked things up. My pronouns are pessimistic/stoic/sleepy. > mRNA vaccines were absolutely a breakthrough therapy. ...a "breakthrough" that was incorrectly touted a fix for the pandemic, that would also be used to cure all disease, etc... (Again, not by the researchers themselves, but by pretty much everyone else.) In the end, it definitely bought time for the elderly (and unhealthy), until Omicron actually changed the game. If we had not got this particular mutation "winning ticket", given the disappointing efficiency of mRNA vaccines on infection and transmission, I'm unfortunately convinced that we would still have to show proof of a recent vaccination to get a coffee. (And since I'm in a particularly bad mood, let's not talk about the long term societal effects of mandates and restrictions and penalization of "not blindly trusting your government", which will reveberate.) At least, we learnt that "maaaaybe it's worth testing our medecines on the half of humanity that has a functioning uterus" [1], which is a "breakthrough discovery" that almost arrived _after_ nuclear fusion. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/vaccine-trials-should-monitor-menstrual-changes-researchers-say-rcna57520 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/vaccine-trials-...
dylan604 4y ago
There have been lots of press releases from universities looking to capitalize on the research done under their "leadership". Never mind that research is usually financed by grants and similar methods. So many of these announcements claim to be stupendous achievements, and they very well may be, but they tend to come with no real way of achieving commercial success. It's not necessarily the fault of the researchers and they did what they set out to do. It's the marketing teams that make it sickening to the point we've all become calloused to this kind of science spam. Does ignition fall into the same category? We'll see

throwaway4aday 4y ago

> Basically, the very big and undeniable shit hits you, immediately, right now, with regularity, while the hypothetical bits of maybe good news always are touted as breakthrough even though they will just be "for some times later". This just seems like an argument against transparency in research which I think is the wrong direction to take things since it's more helpful to the overall direction of research to publish incremental results so others can build on them sooner. You may be misconstruing the reporting of small, incremental steps as something akin to crying wolf when really you're just seeing all the hard work that goes into solving big problems that eventually produces "very big undeniable shit". It's all part of the same thing, small steps move you towards a big goal, it's hard to get as excited about them as it is about the final product but you can't have the latter without the former.

phtrivier 4y ago
> This just seems like an argument against transparency in research. Sorry if that sounded this way. As I said, "kudos to the researchers". They probably have good reasons to be happy, and we can cheer them for that - but the expections for the word "breakthrough" to be used for the layman are not met, sorry.