[omd]

Here's a crazy thought. What if they use this opportunity to teach kids about the processes of scientific discovery and how it is sometimes based on pure chance. What if they then teach those kids about the scientific method and how to conduct a controlled experiment. Even if the story turns out to be a dud I guarantee the experience would make the students much more excited about science than growing some cress in a window sill.

Or we could explain how a bunch of scientists are crackpots for even thinking such a thing.

[saurik]

I feel like you are arguing with me. I am saying this because a some people are commenting here about what the ramifications of this discovery is; others, asking "serious" questions about the quality of the research, as if they should have taken certain things into account. I am pointing out that this isn't the right context for that analysis.

Also, that education is not news to post here in the first place. This is not a website where children are learning about science. There are tons of "discoveries" made as school experiments: I don't expect to see them on the front page of Hacker News (unless, like, there is some kind of serious interest in the larger science community). ;P

[jacquesm]

> This is not a website where children are learning about science.

On a website this size such assumptions are almost invariably false.

[jlgreco]

Nevertheless, HN is not a highschool science fair. The reason this story is making the rounds on the internet is very plainly not to get children interested in the scientific process, but rather because wifi somehow being dangerous is a provocative concept and therefore a good way to get pageviews.