I understand that this link is authwalled (by accounts that can be created for free), but it's telling of the medium how the actual paper itself is downvoted while the majority of the rest of the comments appear to either be tangential/unrelated to the article, or stem from misunderstandings of the actual paper; RTFA still applies after all these years.
Or perhaps it shows HN wears no clothes. No one knows what it it, yet here it is on the front page. There is zero reason to think there is any higher meaning to HN if we work it out.
Is there any reason the think HN is better on topics they know or should know?
It could well be babble. To me it feels like a obfuscation of something well studied.
The author has worked on "rejuvenation of decontaminated N95 masks" which you can see how you might want to delete the memory. Not saying the topic is bad, but still think this paper is publish or perish.