> we instructed each pair to generate creative uses for a product for five minutes and then spend one minute selecting their most creative idea.
This is published in Nature, why? it's a very narrow definition of "creativeness" . Such claims have a mountain to climb. Scientists have been doing remote work for decades, it's not like all the creative stuff happened in attention-deprived conferences.
Popular "debate" in the news cycle, scientific authority based on crude subjective judgment, interests of capital.
This sort of viral bad science is something you would expect from reddit but not from hackernews. I suspect this site is becoming more like the former.
To be clear, I'm not making claims on whether or not remote work is more or less creative.
Just highlighting the point that bad science that fits a certain popular trend in online media gets clicks and engagement.
Comments like yours get little to no engagement because it actually addresses the article and is not an empty anecdotal debate for entertainment.
What makes this site intellectually engaging is that it is text-focused and doesn't host porn. It is much better at being what reddit wanted to be, but I think it it is "crossing the chasm" which is a term I learned here.
I think it is time to log off for good and get back to work. This sort of thing enough of a reason. Do not want to waste life scrolling.
This is published in Nature, why? it's a very narrow definition of "creativeness" . Such claims have a mountain to climb. Scientists have been doing remote work for decades, it's not like all the creative stuff happened in attention-deprived conferences.