>>12755634I'd never be able to find the links, but I remember one that was like "FAMOUS MATHEMATICIAN CLAIMS ALL OF MATHEMATICS IS DOOMED TO COLLAPSE" and when I looked up the source it was Kevin Buzzard giving a talk supporting computerized proofs to rule out the possibility of undetected human errors in the literature.
Then another one about some guy who proved something esoteric vaguely related to something Ramanujan did where the journalist didn't even attempt to explain what was proven and basically just wrote a short biography of Ramanujan.
>>12755647Fucking this. The actual science goes through several layers of stupidity before it reaches a mass media consumer
Scientist ->
Scientist dumbing it down for the secretary writing the uni's press release ->
Secretary (with at most a B.A. in the subject) who still doesn't really understand anything ->
Journalist with a journalism degree who's, at best, seen a few of the words before and needs to write some clickbait
If you find a media article about something scienc-y, the ONLY use it should have to you is to give you a link or citation to some actual research that you can look up on arxiv or scihub. If you can't learn anything from the primary research then you're probably just out of luck.
