Re:Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
by yummypaint on Monday December 12, 2022 @04:36PM
(#33960761)
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.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
by whimsicalism on Monday December 12, 2022 @05:48PM
(#33961596)
Bodied, and deservedly so.
Bringing FTX into a discussion of nuclear fusion to justify skepticism is parody-worthy.
Re:Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
by stuckinhell on Tuesday December 13, 2022 @09:10AM
(#33969059)
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.
Re:Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
by stuckinhell on Monday December 12, 2022 @04:39PM
(#33960805)
"reflexive contrarians" in the context here was being used a perojative rhetorical trick to broadly dismiss valid doubts people have about this research.
Re:Fusion energy breakthrough by Livermore Lab
by yummypaint on Tuesday December 13, 2022 @10:32AM
(#33970149)
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.