But how? Do Journals not have some automated system that checks whether the papers rederenced by citations exist?
I get how the content might not be what is claimed, but “Does this paper exist?” Really seems like a problem solvable by editors.

Hacktivist deletes white supremacist websites live on stage during hacker conference | TechCrunch A hacker known as Martha Root broke in and deleted three white supremacists websites at the end of a talk during the annual hacker conference Chaos Communication Congress in Germany.

A hacker known as Martha Root broke in and deleted three white supremacists websites at the end of a talk during the annual hacker conference Chaos Communication Congress in Germany.

These two images of Chinese train driver Han Junjia were taken less than 30 years apart.

Transformative change is possible when it is relentlessly pursued.

You and me both

The Embassy staff of Germany, France and the United Kingdom sing Schedryk in the Kyiv underground.
Wonderful!

Science’s 2025 Breakthrough of the Year: The unstoppable rise of renewable energy Clean energy infrastructure is being deployed with unmatched scale and speed—and China is leading the way

China now dominates global production of renewable energy technologies.

It makes 80% of the world’s solar cells, 70% of its wind turbines, and 70% of its lithium batteries, at prices no competitor can match.

🧪

www.science.org/content/arti...

Not to say there is no place for genAI, but there seems to be a trend to blindly apply AI to all kinds of products without any regards of UX, error bars, actual applicability, etc.
This trend is what people are sceptical of.

Can we please please please start articles about AI with a disambiguation about what kind exactly we are talking about?
AlphaFold is very much different from generative AI, both in the underlying technology and in domain it is used.

Will it be recorded somewehere?

What is your process like when reading very technical books like this? Do you take notes or read it like a novel?

Is it that a database is a glorified spreadsheet or that a spreadsheet is a glorified database?

a cartoon of a man in a suit and tie reading a piece of paper Alt: a cartoon of a man in a suit and tie reading a piece of paper

I propose this format

I am not claiming that Sabine wanted to frame her video as such. But it can be done in this way, and in a time where science is becoming more politicized, someone will create this framing for it.
End of 🧵

What Sabine crucially left out is essentially the self correcting nature of the scientific process. The framing of the video essentially becomes "The scientific community knowingly wastes taxpayer money, deceives the public, everybody inside knows and nobody speaks up." 🧵

However, when speaking to the general public, filling in information which laymen may not know is important. In this example, it would be important to mention that the transfer of information is not instantaneous, and thus relativity theory is not broken. 🧵

The issue is the missing contextualization of the presented information. To give an example closer to my field of knowledge, I could make the truthful statement: "Instantaneous change of a quantum state is possible via quantum teleportation"
This is not a false statement. 🧵

Of course, criticism does in fact happen within the HEP community. Even as a layman, I was able to find multiple papers of the sort, for example arXiv:2001.00101
To be clear, Sabine never says this is not the case, but the omission of mentioning this is devastating. 🧵

In the video, Sabine presents this email as proof of the HEP community knowingly deceiving the public. The framing (knowingly or by accident) implies a consensus in the community to deceive the public 🧵

I will say that the idea of someone essentially sending a confession to a colleague they barely know in the hopes of stopping them from criticizing the field seems off to me. Despite that, lets assume the email is authentic and truthful for the remainder of the 🧵

First I want to point out that the authenticity of the email is questionable at best. Of course Sabine (rightfully) will not disclose the identity of the researcher, from the information she shared with us even she herself cannot verify the email address really belongs to that person. 🧵

Sabine Hossenfelders latest criticism of the field of high energy physics
A thread 🧵

With these kinds of claims I always wonder why the interviewers tend to barely challenge them. Like what calculations did you do to base your claims in? Where did you publish your results?

That future seems veeeery distant

NASA did a feature on me last year. It was up this weekend but now when you click on the link you get a 404 message.

Myths around quantum computation before full fault tolerance: What no-go theorems rule out and what they don't In this perspective article, we revisit and critically evaluate prevailing viewpoints on the capabilities and limitations of near-term quantum computing and its potential transition toward fully fault...

To reach some consensus about the prospects of near-term (late nisq and early fault tolerant) quantum computing, we had a 3-day discussion event (“Quantum Now”) in Lapland with both optimists and pessimists. This continued at SeeQA 2024 in Oxford. See our conclusions here arxiv.org/abs/2501.05694

Well now i am really curious about the section Nonquotable Quotes

Today I was asked in an interview about folks who use the weirdness of ✨quantum✨ to hawk pseudoscience junk. I think that kind of grift proliferates because of a big misunderstanding a lot of folks have about quantum mechanics, which is not really their fault!
🧵