[prof-dr-ir]

Two things can be true at the same time: one, quanta magazine is the best publication out there when it comes to popularizing recent advances in fundamental physics and mathematics; and two, this article was bad.

If we are allowed to base our opinion of a publication on one article, should I declare that Mateus Araújo's blog is dead to me?

[pyb]

Journalism is about trust. In a sense, scientific magazines are only as good as their worst articles. My opinion just shifted from "if it's in Quanta, it's probably correct" to "I need to fact-check everything they say".

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

This article is particularly bad, but I can't remember the last time I saw a Quanta article that didn't grossly misrepresent the research.

[aortega]

The article is brilliant until observed.

[dudeinjapan]

Schrödinger's magazine?

[sigmoid10]

Only if these two things were mutually exclusive. But in reality, the underlying assumption is a false dichotomy.