simorley

> "my house will go up in value if I restrict all other building" is more accurate.

This was also a reason used to keep blacks and minorities out of predominately white neighborhoods. Many people believed that bringing blacks into a neighborhood would devalue their homes. Once a black person moved into your neighborhood - "there goes the neighborhood".

It was a self-fulfilling prophesy because once blacks moved into a neighborhood, all the white families would move out ( white flight ) which caused housing values to collapse since there were so many more sellers than buyers.

On the flip side, it's why gentrification increases home values. As blacks/minorities are kicked out of the neighborhood and it becomes more white, it attracts more whites to move in. More buyers than sellers. Gentrification is the exact opposite of the white flight phenomenon in america.

This comment is so antithetical to the "spirit of the internet" and hacking in general that I'm in shock.

> 77% of the Youtube audience in the US are 17-25 years old, it's not some niche forum for engineers and the notion that they can read scientific papers and weed out legitimate science created at home from misinformation is absurd.

Only PhDs or engineers are allowed to be interested? You think only people with CS degrees should learn about programming/hacking? Only people with electric engineering degrees should learn about circuits?

Also 17-25 is mostly adults. Also, wouldn't the people who watch his videos be self-selecting? I'm guessing 99% of the demographic you mentioned wouldn't be searching for his video.

> The author has a company that sells genetic engineering kits to people and by banning him from Youtube that impacts him financially.

Probably. But so what?

> I personally think Biohacking and eccentric science is cool

But people in the 17-25 year old demographics are not allowed to find it cool and enjoy it?

Your argument is that it could be harmful and therefore everyone 17-25 should be barred from it. That's the argument I heard in the 90s to prevent young people from learning to code/hack/etc. I don't understand how the culture of censorship and patronizing paternalism snuck into the "hacking"/tech environment.

I no more trust VPN providers than I do online pdf converters. I wonder how many people submit their sensitive documents to these online services to convert their documents to pdf.

If hollywood made a movie about it, then it most likely is oversold.

> especially in the Anglosphere.

What does he expect. We've always done this. Whether it is with thomas edison, the wright brothers, etc. Each nation/ethnic group oversells their achievements and minimizes others. We also did that in terms of gender/race. Women and minorities have been undersold.

The germans do the same thing. Gutenberg didn't invent the movable type. It existed in china, korea, etc for centuries before gutenburg.

It's human nature. All nations/groups do this. Imagine how native americans feel when we tell them columbus discovered the americas.

Everything the author wrote appears valid though. Turing didn't invent the computer. He didn't create computer science. He didn't win ww2. What he did is solve Hilbert's Decision Problem ( which church did before turing ) in a very interesting manner. With or without Turing, we'd still have computers, we'd still have computer science and we'd still have won ww2.

But sadly, the masses need heroes and heroes are created/manufactured by their advocates. Turing for a variety of reasons has more advocates than church, godel, etc. And unfortunately for the writer, it's an anglo world and our message will be the loudest and most visible.

The author states the truth but he is a lone voice in the wilderness. A few thousand will probably read his factual article while millions will watch the misleading "The Imitation Game" and read the misleading articles from the media. It must be frustating for the author, but truth is at a disadvantage to fiction here.

> Seems to be a lot of uneasiness, of late, about the way credit is allocated in science.

Of late? You should read up on Newton/Leibniz hysterics over who invented calculus. The arguments over who invented the first light bulb, car, etc. Whether greek knowledge ( the foundation of western civilization ) originated in the near east or even in india. Heck, people still argue about who "discovered" america first. There is national, religious, ethnic, racial, gender, sexuality pride tied to "priority". It's not just in science/math, it's applies to everything.

> These figures are supposed to be idolized and idealized

Why? They weren't particularly good people. Neither were saints.

> Achilles elevated Greece by giving Greeks something to collectively aspire to or adulate.

Are you talking about science/knowledge or politics? But you are right on the point. It's what this is all about at the end of the day. Politics.

Without politics, the discovery/knowledge would be what is important. Because of politics, the people become the focal point.