I think you're misreading this. I'm not saying "you are wrong". I'm saying there's a common trap that a lot of people in tech (and therefore a lot of people on

I think you're misreading this. I'm not saying "you are wrong". I'm saying there's a common trap that a lot of people in tech (and therefore a lot of people on HN fall into), where they believe that they can solve any problem from what they know of basic tech problems. > What features of the scientific method cannot be achieved through the composition of existing technologies? ^This statement, sums up the above trap perfectly. "I know how to create a workflow, therefore, I know how to create a workflow of the scientific method, therefore I can replace a scientist with an AI robot." But okay, how do we know what quantitatively, is a significant result? R=0.05 is the most common cut-off for this, but like, that's a number we picked, and isn't even agreed on.