0 chance this revenue gets reinvested back into the game lmao

✊

Lmaoooo my friend is also from academia so our situations may be 1:1

Like normal people with more quirks. I will say that experience has lead me to believe that sometimes those quirks require a bit more patience/tolerance in extended company.

I’m friends with an autistic guy who’s very good at what he does and we share some interests, but he tries too hard to talk about what he wants to talk about and unfortunately it’s pushing others away.

I was surprised to see Robert Evans as a rolling stone writer. I love his podcasts. Article was a great read.

peer reviewed properly

Is the important bit here. The timeline from that Wikipedia article shows it was published in 2005 and work disproving it’s claim came around in 2006.

If a scientists work is retracted it really kills any more funding they receive. They use examples like the DRBG one as what not to be.

I know someone in this field and sent him this article. He said the “NIST isn’t being transparent” claim isn’t true

https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=927303 https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2020/NIST.IR.8309.pdf https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=934458

He also responded with “of course the NSA would try and mess with it, but if it’s peer reviewed properly I don’t see how they would be successful”