There's difference between raising hope and raising hype. Those Twitter gurus ride on any wave convincing of people of whatever they can just to get more traffic. It's mostly harmless until you find people obsessing over updates and start betting on it.
Those "twitter gurus" were actively trying to recreate the paper, and a lot of those "twitter gurus" are actual founders doing actual hardtech startups with relevant degrees and labs.
This - these aren't hopeful people with a layman's understanding cheering on the scientific method, they're hype bros looking to gather gullible followers and shill cryptocurrencies to them based on yet another thing they're utterly clueless about and don't care to inform themselves on.
I don’t think this is true. When I heard of LK-99, I remember talking of my friends about it and we sort of daydreamed about what it could mean for society if true. None of us are on social media anymore (except HN if you count that).
Sometimes you just get excited, or want to be excited. Otherwise it’s back to wake up, work, eat dinner, sleep. When cool stuff seems to be happening, why wouldn’t we talk about it? Even if it ends up being a dud, it’s still something to talk about out.
I love "They-ing" because if it's even lightly questioned someone will jump in to explain they know They, and add even more qualifiers. Ex. if we weren't on HN "tech bros" and "AI hype" would start being invoked.
You know you can block and mute people on Twitter, right? The actual true grifters of the kind you are talking about are pretty rare in terms of a per user basis (though get get lots of distribution), and most of them are very bad at concealing themselves.
