4 ms·
How many other programs were studying the same subject? That's what we don't know. Insiders have reported for decades about redundant research, programs, etc.
by typeofhuman 2y ago
How many other programs were studying the same subject? That's what we don't know. Insiders have reported for decades about redundant research, programs, etc.
- crummy 2y agoHopefully some!
- rscho 2y agoRedundancy in research is necessary. It's a good thing.
- ashoeafoot 2y agoBut then you dont cut with non insiders. You instead reward the reporting of bogus science and corruption bx handling a reward grant worth half the cut grand to the reporter. Make experts clean the house, instead of idiots tearing the house down , becsuse they can not tell apart a load bearing beam from drywall .
- ben_w 2y agoThat question is a general problem with anything secret. Or rather, potential problem, because "can this research be reproduced?" is also a useful question, which means random replication of such work is genuinely desirable. In any case, this specific program wasn't one of the secret ones.
- derbOac 2y agoThis is not the way to come to know. Regardless, much of this was known already if you would just look. The idea that Elon is discovering anything other than for himself, to say the least of being in a position to decide what to do about what is "found", is laughable. They can't even tell the difference between millions and billions of dollars, or who is vital to nuclear safety. It's like Chesterton's fence, but where the fence turns out to be vital, where you could find out what the fence is for by just asking the farmer, and where the person tearing down the fence knows nothing about fences or farming, and happens to run an animal and wildlife control company.