“ Now realize that publicly stating your lab had a protocol failure of this magnitude and you face career death, the possible eradication of your lab and it’s connections, etc.”
From my previous comment.
It wouldn’t be the least bit surprising that these researchers wouldn’t say it happened even if they had strong evidence it did.
The downsides are obviously not good for them nor their careers in any way. God forbid they themselves could be found connected to the responsibility and would inevitably become a scapegoat.
And if they did come out and nothing happened to them - what positives would occur? “Reforming safety protocols”? All that would do is create more red tape in the future and inhibit research even more.
I think you should better evaluate the context of what a scientist in that position would face and think. You really quickly see there’s a lot of grey area, and we can’t think very highly of our typical standards of proof.
Of course, i’m not saying “absolutely it was a leak”. Simply that you’re holding the theory to such high standards of proof as to be, imho, unreasonable.
“scientists who believed a lab leak idea was plausible couldn't muster up an argument that would hold up under peer review”
Scientists work with covid viruses, scientists accidentally contract virus when one of a thousand technical protocols accidentally slipped, scientists unknowingly spread virus.
I worked in a clean lab for years with, presumably, much lower tolerances than you would want at a lab studying deadly viruses. We had leaks all the time even with protocols in place. Scientists are smart, they aren’t perfect and make mistakes.
Now realize that publicly stating your lab had a protocol failure of this magnitude and you face career death, the possible eradication of your lab and it’s connections, etc.
You’re saying no lab leak claims “held up under peer review” and it’s “not supported by facts”. I’m not sure if you get this, but if this did leak from a lab then there would probably be zero way to trace that without speculation. You’re not going to go find a covid virus with a time stamp and location of where it came from or where it moved. How on Earth would one ever prove this?
I have a feeling that your terms of proof a priori make it impossible to ever conclude a lab leak was the cause…
On the other side of the spectrum - code reviews have never, not even one single time, given me any real opportunity to learn something of value. They have only ever been someone else shoving their preferences onto my coding style (for better or worse)
I was shocked at my first job to realize the code reviewer didn’t even read my code, merely glanced over and demanded style changes (which were not consistent from review to review in the slightest)
It really felt more like how you hand your advisor your thesis with obvious easy to fix errors so he doesn’t compulsively decide “well something must need improvement” and make you fix something difficult
“ I look for readable, maintainable code, and try to make sure the writer is doing appropriate testing. But whether or not it works and is correct, that's not my job, that's the developer's job.”
And I personally refuse to work with this style of workflow anymore
Does the code do what it needs? That’s objective and it either does or doesn’t. I can manage that kind of review.
Does the code look pretty enough? This is subjective and guarantees i’ll waste hours of my life every month bc someone else felt anxious/neurotic/masochistic and wanted to dump a chore on me.
No thanks, if you have style guidelines i’ll follow them. I’m not your whipping boy that will ask how high when you say jump.
Yeah, this is an issue with way more science than anyone (esp scientists) is comfortable acknowledging
In grad school I encountered experiment after experiment, paper after paper where the authors went around emphasizing the parts which were statistically “sexy” while ignoring glaring issues like this
It’s almost like the methodology for creating science is more rigorous than the science itself
Sometimes the sample is too small. Sometimes they assume a correlation that doesn’t exist. It’s troubling and was a large part of why I left academia
I don’t really follow. There are billions/trillions of these creatures who are eaten alive every year in the wild. Why is it so significant that humans also do this?
Are we trying to make reality fit our wholesome romanced version of reality?
Not that I could stomach it myself, but I don’t really see this as much of a moral issue.
I have to assume through some form of leptogensis or similar that we could engineer our galaxies or maybe entire universe so that this feature is at least delayed much longer, if not avoided entirely
It was just a casual bbq with very relaxed friends.
Being social and fitting in is a skill like any other. So many people in tech believe they don’t need to work this particular muscle and it shows
Can you talk about things with a stranger at length that aren’t in your core interests?
Can you make people interested in what you’re talking about even if they’re not exactly your kind of people?
Do you have confidence when you speak, at least enough to get your words across? Do you enjoy being around others in a purely social situation?
All these kinds of things are important. And personally I think they should be developed before one injects themselves into foreign places. For safety as much as the respect of those you travel to
It’s a warm climate with large cities which provide sufficient incentive for people to choose to be homeless over other avenues of living
Homeless people obviously want to live somewhere like Cali over Canada for the winter. California also provides massive welfare to homeless. They also have a very open arms policy to illegals who are often poor and homeless
These aren’t exhaustive reasons why, but it’s a core part of it. California politicians seem to be unwilling to address complicated social problems head on and instead virtue signal and allow these problems to grow and fester
I’m not going to provide you with sources. It’s too politicized of a subject. If you don’t want to accept it for being this way i’ve learned not to argue. But at the very least if people really can’t see why this problem exists as it does, here an entry
I had a stranger recently come up to me and ask to come to an event I was inviting others to. No problem! Come along
But the thing is the dude was very shy and awkward. Which isn’t a problem, but definitely cast a bit of a cloud over our social event
All of a sudden I was managing him, taking time and focus out of my night to make him feel welcome. I’m sure he didn’t intend it, but he didn’t make it seem as though he were ungrateful
There are so many little social cues to make social work. And if you’re not even remotely part of the group, you’re probably going to clash
Which is all well and good - it’s let of meeting people… but this guy was just blowing through town. All the investment for what? So he could be 1,000 miles away next week? (he said he would be)
The problem with nomads or even superficial travelers is you are taking from the environment you travel to but rarely give much back. And as the trend grows this back and forth becomes tiring fast
So basically if you’re going to travel or be a nomad - be a badass people want to be around. Commit to it and be ready when you get there to shine a personality. If you can’t do it in an environment and culture you’re familiar with - respect the people you travel to by working on yourself first.
Don’t expect other people to be the prop up to make your life interesting
Go to a nursing home sometime that isn’t super duper nice and expensive. You’ll see underpaid healthcare professionals using unwieldly and underserving equipment treating people they disdain all for gross profit from corporations
Then ask yourself if elderly abuse is really surprising at all
Never mind friends. I just wanted to make people think a little, but that’s always a mistake here.
For the record: I’m quite skeptical that the lab leak theory is true.