[flagged]

"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I think skepticism is healthy for the vast majority of sensationalized titles especially those coming from corporate entities. You'll very often find me in those OAI/Anthrop threads being very critical of their claims.

I like applying that same rigor to articles like this one. This is not a revolutionary discovery, it is a possible, un-replicated new avenue that could become revolutionary with enough of an evidence base. But there are many dozens of these same kinds of discoveries published all the time often leading to dead-ends (which is actually great since that's another rabbit hole you no longer have to chase - here's to null findings!)

In the same way you shouldn't accept PR regurgitated by so-called 'independent' journals when they come from corporate and government institutions, the same rigor should be applied to PR from universities seeking grants