Lol. Sorry but all I can say.

And I might also argue: the computer approaches that preceded it. It is easier to find the right direction when hundreds had shown before you what works worse or better. There is a reason why they shared the Nobel Prize with Baker.

Some actual cases I have encountered recently in "real" journals, connected to "reputable" publishers:
- high OA fee but low quality papers just bc similar to big name journal from same publisher
- AI slop in papers
- AI slop review
- predatory self-citing review

Who is really "predatory"?

Predatory journals/publishers are often described having problematic practices such as
- charging high OA fees but no quality in return
- names similar to big name journals to suggest a connection & illusion of quality
- AI slop and predatory self-citing reviews, papers etc.

Meanwhile...

Things like AlphaFold were great back when we had a scientific infrastructure. Without the PDB and CASP, how far would it have got? It’s a major issue when gigawatts of power are being diverted to train universal function approximators to come up with more believable lies.

Lying plagiarism bots represent a tremendous opportunity for misinformation. Agentic drones represent a tremendous opportunity for repression (why is Iran such a huge producer? Oh right). The way the tools are being used right now is a problem. Maybe there’s a better way but so far it’s hard to see.

www.barwmedical.com/index.php/BM...
Interesting suggestion... although can't help but makes me think the idea was suggested because of how many "real" and "big" journals easily fit the original definition of "predatory" (ie. publishing fees with no quality in return) 👀

Thank you a lot for the answers, and enjoy your meal!

formation of such a scaffolding complex is independent from concentration. Or is it rather stochiometry, and a higher concentration only influences the timescale of the formation of the supramolecular complex?

Therefore, talking about "membraneless organelles" is still valid, right?
It just cannot be stated that the boundaries of these organelles are defined by LLPS.
I'm interested in if, and if yes, how does concentration play a role in this then, because I find it hard to believe that the

as it is simply a supramolecular complex, and the "gel-like" physical properties are no surprise considering that's what we expect from densely packed proteins?

Ie. it is not a simple concentration threshold that triggers the formation of these complexes, instead it's multivalent protein interactions, and therefore it cannot be called LLPS,

the thread is not questioning the existence of these complexes eg. nuclear bodies, PSD etc., and their physical properties (which are often described as "gel-like"), instead, what is being questioned is the fundamental physical explanation behind the phenomenon?

I'm just a baby (ie. not even officially PhD yet), so I'm a bit afraid to comment on this, but it's somewhat related to my dissertation topic, and I currently have 3 hours of free time during a car ride, so I won't hold back my questions.
So if I'm understanding correctly,

James Watson, dead at 97, was a scientific legend and a pariah among his peers James Watson, the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA who died Thursday at 97, was a scientific legend and a pariah among his peers.

A Sharon Begley byline, almost 5 years after her death.

Upon hearing the news James Watson had died, a STAT reporter said in our Slack, "I wish I could read what Sharon would have written."

Incredible news: Sharon in fact did pre-write a Watson obit. And it is masterful and excoriating.
🧪🧬🧫

My ask of any science enthusiasts who tell the story of Rosalind Franklin:
Don't make her life be about the DNA debacle. She died far too young, but she was a promising scientist in her own right, a mentor and scientific author.

Not for Watson or Crick, but for her legacy.

Before Watson and Crick in 1953 Came Friedrich Miescher in 1869 Abstract. The story of genetics typically omits the original discovery of the molecular nature of DNA: Friedrich Miescher's 1869 discovery of the substance

Watson and Crick elucidated the structure of DNA. Stop saying that they discovered DNA! This was done by another guy you probably haven't heard of! And therein lies a story. academic.oup.com/genetics/art...

James Watson's life was such an extreme example of how... not to live.
Nobel prize for possibly the most impactful discovery of the last century, turns out to be mostly stolen results, then he spends the rest of his life embarrassing himself and now everyone remembers him as "that racist scientist".

James Watson, dead at 97, was a scientific legend and a pariah among his peers James Watson, the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA who died Thursday at 97, was a scientific legend and a pariah among his peers.

James Watson was not just a scientist who was a racist. He was worse - a scientist who offered other racists the comfort of scientific authority.

I had dates fail because I was like this 😶 Isn't even an exaggeration.

Deep learning-assisted tools to understand the structural biology of the synapse - Biomedical Engineering Letters The function of our brain is the result of the balanced interplay between billions of neurons forming a network of enormous complexity. However, the neurons themselves are also immensely complex entit...

link.springer.com/article/10.1...

So thankful to have recieved the opportunity to participate in this review!

Yes, some kids do become astronauts or presidents at the end. But not many.

But there are MANY scientists in the world. You have a much better chance to achieve it. A scientist isn't a cartoon character, it's a REAL JOB. It's REAL PEOPLE. That's what scicomm needs to focus on these day imo.

Hot take: WE DO NOT NEED TO "PROMOTE" SCIENCE ANYMORE.

Every kid knows that "scientists" are cool, it's one of the careers they all dream about at one point.

And that's exactly the problem.
Like astronaut, or president. Cool, desirable - therefore childish and unrealistic.

YES. Damn, I wish I had the courage for this. I always feel pressured to keep it professional in science circles while my artist persona is very very far from this. Sometimes my brain feels like it's splitting. I just keep wishing for the day I can merge these two sides of me.

Maybe next year.

We have added new functionality to include a plot of protein disorder using IUPred scores generated by iupred2a.elte.hu. Generate IUPred scores for your POI and upload the JSON file to generate this plot.

Fingers crossed for an NMR topic tomorrow or on Wednesday! 🥺

Thank you for the explanation! My PhD topic briefly touched on LLPS so while seeing these predictions was interesting, I couldn't help but fear it would follow the trend of recent hype topics receiving the prize... Good to see it wasn't the case and the awardees are totally unexpected.

In a good or a bad way?

So yes, it's far more important to have good journalism and good science communicators who summarize the current scientific consensus in a digestable format.
And proper education of course, so that people don't have to start from absolute zero when they want to look into a topic more deeply.