[girvo]

> So many failures could be logged so I didn’t waste my time doing non-working or poor yielding reactions

In a different but related world, clandestine chemists share failures more often than they do their successes, at least in the communities I was a part of a very long time ago.

I'd wager this is because our substrates, reagents and solvents are such a pain in the arse to get compared to an actual lab, that wasting any of them is a no-go if it can be avoided.

Related to that, but we reused solvents and recycled material a lot more than I did doing my B.Sci in Chemistry, for the same reasons!

[orbifold]

I actually think it is the same in chemistry, knowledge of which approaches don't work are a competitive advantage that is passed around under the hand. I've definitely observed this is in theoretical physics and pure mathematics, it is often much more important to know about things that have never been published then it is to read close to incomprehensible publications. So for example it is much more valuable to have attended the right seminars and have private copies of lecture notes, because by the time something is published it probably is out of date 1-3 years.

[disillusioned]

Do they then go on to be script consultants for Breaking Bad?