researchers

It's called researchers bias where someone so fervently believes something is true that it influences their research.

It's also shared between a small population of researchers, leading to far more bandwidth per capita.

We're a London (UK) based startup that includes ex MIT researchers, PhDs, and successful serial entrepreneurs, all with 10+ years industry experience.

There are a handful of researchers who have a surplus of talented people who want to work with them, but most researchers are starved to find people who are both talented and passionate about their subject.

All of our consultants are also security researchers, with dedicated research time.

Conversely, researchers have poor judgement assessing the economic value of their inventions.

You think we have infinite medical researchers with infinite resources and infinite budgets?

My ability to communicate has always led to my role as the technical point of contact for researchers, clinicians (surgeons, radiologists, etc.), and senior executives.

The only way we can know for sure I suppose, is through the efforts of independent researchers brave enough to get close to the facility.

About fifteen years ago, it was a problem for researchers of moving large data stores, and whether it's faster to do it with a network or with suitcases full of tapes.

Many researchers compare those shifts with changing attitudes towards certain professions (say, by counting certain words when they're described in the media etc.), with women participation usually correlated negatively with prestige.

> Conversely, researchers have poor judgement assessing the economic value of their inventions.

Similar to the last point, but this should be followed by "according to [Researchers'] model" and not left as a plain assertion.

First the facts: > Here’s what the researchers discovered: barely one-fifth (21%) of employees are truly engaged in their work, in the sense that they would “go the extra mile” for their employer.

Looks like bad science to me: "the researchers tested 16 women" But if you don't also test some men in the exact same chamber you know nothing because you have no control to compare to.

> but you can find comments about him from people who claim he's a "nuclear shill" and so regardless as a matter of principle it would be prudent to get more independent researchers involved in gathering data.

Researchers however don't get rewarded for inspiring peers, they only get rewarded for doing the work.