TechTakes

It is a very highly resistive poor quality material. Period. No point in fighting with the truth. Data have spoken.

The way this phrase is worded is weird in my opinion. It sounds more like a political statement rather than a scientific one.

This isn't the first unprofessional message from that Twitter account during the lk99 saga. Their biased tone makes them untrustworthy. Even more than anime girl et al

I keep seeing posts exactly like these from the orange site’s top minds. it’s not doing what they think it’s doing for their reputation as science understanders. shit, anyone who’s hung around in a lab when a result won’t replicate knows the tone of that tweet

Markets are just the average sentiment of a mass of greedy people trying to make a buck, there is no inherent prediction power.

HN user tarsinge putting it perfectly here

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.

This is basically the epitome of postmodernism these people love dunking on. There's no external truth, only utterances. When prediction markets have hegemony, that will be Truth.

I'm wryly amused that of all people, the rats putting their dismal hopes into the prediction markets not going to zero are the ones screeching about scientism.

This Twitter post from the guy who was synthesising the stuff in the US seems convincing: https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip/status/1689476909208600576

Not a superconductor - the hints of superconductor-like properties were due to a combination of iron contamination in the Pb forming iron fragments which (surprise!) show ferromagnetism & Copper Sulphide which shows a very similarly anomalous temp/resistivity profile (but is not a superconductor).

The most likely outcome (i.e., not a superconductor, lab error due to honest scientists being fooled by their own experiments) seems to be probably the true one.

superior rationalists trained by EY are obviously better than anyone else, how they dare to come against them with some flimsy "empirical evidence" smh

it's like with metamed but without the actual thing