Hacker News Reader

Comment by prof-dr-ir | Hacker News Reader

79 points as of now. And how many points would hacker news have given to the Nature comment by Giudice and Gianotti?

It is both curious and sad to see the outsize attention given to bitter polemicists (and not just in physics).

Please read https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-020-01054-6 .

Edit: downvotes? let me rephrase: if you care about particle physics then there was no reason to ignore the original proposal. if you care about outrage, on the other hand...

View on HN

What are you highlighting? That article is a generic press releases saying they want $30B to look at particles.

I am afraid that, no matter how well thought out a strategy or plan for the future really is, there is always a ranting blogger who will get more attention.

And in that tradition I guess I should have expected a dismissive reply using 'generic press release' to describe the Comment that introduces an entire section of Nature Physics.

I think it's very interesting to see publicly a back and forth dialogue of two sides discussing the merits and demerits of a scientific proposal.

It's a rare sight, and the contrarian view is necessary, we need red teams so that things don't become too one-sided and people can overcome their biases. I think the inherent structure in academia and in institutions like CERN make it difficult for dissenting voices to be heard, so I'm glad that the view that's going against the grain is getting more attention. In this era of censorship and punishing of whistleblowers I'm surprised she's freely critiquing their core arguments. Although I do see a lot of ad hominem attacks.

I think you are being down voted because you appear to have an ax to grind rather than a useful perspective on the issue.

The insight that people care about outrage is not particularly novel. You yourself care about outrage - it's the reason you left the comment you left. If I care about outrage, on the other hand... What? I'm like you and most other people?

.. then all you end up finding is conflict?

In a better forum the original proposal by the particle physics community would have reached the front page and then a version of this blog post could have been a valid comment.

Now it is the other way around and I think that is unfortunate. Why does it happen?

Building particle accelerators is the status quo. I first looked up a list of upcoming accelerator projects on Wikipedia more than a decade ago. A proposal to continue the status quo is rarely novel. An argument against the status quo brings up new ideas.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com