[cfcf14]

Was fun while it lasted! Will be interesting watching the internal story of the original lab unfold as it all becomes public eventually.

[calderknight]

Just because a Twitter said it's over doesn't mean it's over. Prediction markets still think there's a ~1/5 chance of it being legit.

[doitLP]

Can you share which markets your following?

[ranting-moth]

No it wasn't. Things like this (or at least the dubious media frenzy around this) erode public's trust in science.

[alexmolas]

Science is like that. The problem is not with science or with this material not being super-conducting. The problem is with how science is explained in media. Failing to test hypothesis is a critical step in the scientific method.

[gus_massa]

It's important that public understand the difference between a preprint in arXiv, a paper in a serious peer review journal and the truth.

We've seen a lot of miracle cures during the covid-19 epidemic where all the support was a bunch of preprints (and some of the preprints were horrible, I read a few of them to write angry comments in HN).

A paper in a serious peer review journal (if possible/relevant preregistered and with a randomized controlled group) is much better evidence, but it still can be wrong.