HackerTube.dev

I was asked to keep this confidential

Sabine Hossenfelder · 3.1M views · 2025-02-15 · 9:42

Open on YouTube ↗

If playback is restricted in your region, try opening the original video. Use Mark watched to add it to your marked videos.

Overview

Sabine Hossenfelder reads a confidential email and uses it to explain her worries about academia and incentives in theoretical physics research. She ties it to her earlier Nature Physics comment on research quality.

On Hacker News

Cited in threads about science funding and trust in research as an angry insider critique of academic incentives, though some commenters doubt it.

Recommended by 1 HN people across 1 months · HN mentions 2025–2025

Topics

Search by tags

What people said

howmayiannoyyou · 2025-05 · Strong recommendation

[VIDEO] Sabine highlights the problem with scientific funding in this video and it should be required watching before posting on this thread. Reform is needed. Some good will be tossed with a lot of bad. Its a cycle, a pendulum, and it will eventually tip to excess again sometime in the future. For now... fixing what is broken ought to be the priority.

Read the original HN comment ↗
mollerhoj · 2025-03 · Criticism

It's weird that you'd guess (wrong) that I'm an "LLM bull", then start generalizing the actions of this supposed group. Hallucinations are a problem, no news value there. Sabine seems not to be able to get value out of LLMs, and concludes that they aren't useful. The logic is not exactly impressive. It's a tool. It can be useful, it doesn't always work. Some people claim it's better than it is, some people claim it's worse. This isn't exactly rocket science. Regardless of the tweet in question, Sabine is a grifter. Her novel takes on academia being some kind of conspiracy of people milking the system, and of physicists not being interested in making new discoveries are nonsensical and only serves to increase her own profile. Look at this video of her trying to convince the world she received an email that apparently proves all her points correct. My BS detector tells me she wrote that email herself, but you be the judge: [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗
tim333 · 2025-02 · Reference

It surprises me that some obvious clues to treatment are passed over as I guess they don't fit the politics? Like >A team of researchers in Jerusalem, he says, decided to look at patients who survived bladder cancer and compare dementia prevalence among patients treated with BCG and those who weren’t. “Do they differ in the rate at which they get Alzheimer’s disease?” The answer is yes – the BCG group appeared to get 75% protection against Alzheimer’s. A number of studies have now found varying levels of protection from BCG, with an average, according to one meta‑analysis, of 45%. There's a lot of evidence a lot of it is set off by infectious microbes which can be treated in the usual way. (From [LINK] ) The 'politics' puzzles me. Maybe the head of department got fame for hypothesis A and feels his power or money is threatened by hypothesis B? It's not what science should be about. (There was an entertaining angry Sabine Hossenfelder youtube a few minutes ago on the corruption of science just wasting money, but really letting people die of Alzheimer's is worse. [VIDEO] )

Read the original HN comment ↗

Sources

Video by Sabine Hossenfelder, played through YouTube.

Data and selection notes

HN summaries and labels may contain AI errors. HN dates refer to discussions, not video publication.

HN Library: HackerTube export (2026-10-31) and open-index/hacker-news. Upstream summaries and classifications may contain AI errors.

Views, duration and playback status refresh separately from the published catalog. When an update fails, existing data remains visible.

Selection checks
  • SaaS & AI candidates: Topic keywords do not match
  • Editor-approved picks: Editorial review is required

Rule matches identify candidates. They do not guarantee video quality or financial results.

About the library and its sources