I saw that another commenter suggested this one may have been a repackaged Model M. If it was, it must have had different switches that I preferred.

As an aside, that keyboard in particular had the best click I've ever experienced.

Based on the specs listed, OP was in college just before me or may have overlapped. The big gold CD-R stacks (you could bur in jewel cases, on spindles, or just gross stacks which were nice and cheap) were a huge thing with my group (who encoded to FLAC & MP3 -V0 and burned audio CDs relentlessly. We felt we were archiving our liberal arts college music library and radio library for the future! Who knows. Some of that "future" is still backed up and on hard disks, and I should migrate them to SSD or tape just on principle.

At that point CD-R were cheaper than CD-RWs, and because most archiving/distributing didn't require rewriting (not return-on-investment wise anyway), we just shared programs on CD-R as well. In some ways it was a beautiful technology! Particularly fidelity to a spec everyone tried to bend and break for a profit angle, when honestly, there was no point for many of us using CD-R

We aren't yet. Our projection is that we will be in 5-7 years. I'm turning forty soon.

Just to give you an anchor point.

I doubt we're typical, is my point.

There is absolutely no question--none at all--that amyloid plaques are a key feature of Alzheimer disease, that they are neurotoxic, and that they fit within a number of mechanistic pathways contributing to dementia (which is the broad clinical phenotype).

Interestingly enough, the actual results of the lecanemab (Leqembi) trial is that those on drug had overall 17 months longer in the mild cognitive impairment / mild dementia range before declining to the moderate dementia range. It doesn't stop the disease, but it does measurably slow its course, and that makes a huge difference to families. Whether the linked author can accept that progress is mostly incremental and not wholly satisfying is, I don't know...his problem, but it is rapidly becoming our problem as dementia scientists.

But people love a conspiracy.

I agree that the toothpaste is out of the tube here. But do the mods have to fix the reddit community? If HN gets out of hand, is that dang's fault?

For most of us it's a thankless job full of many uncompensated and thankless tasks, but we do it for any number of reasons. Most academic scientists I meet are capable and (mostly) driven by a desire to uncover knowledge.

As for people feeling shut out of funding: people feel a lot of things all the time, but I've never seen a good idea be repeatedly denied funding because it wasn't amyloid-primary. Unfortunately, it's usually a lack of rigor, lack of pertinence, lack of preliminary data demonstrating plausibility and feasibility, or some combination. Not always--there are big money and prestige politics going on all the time, but that has nothing to do with amyloid.

To add another nearly useless data point, my lab and those I collaborate with focus on amyloid as well as tau, alpha-synuclein, TDP-43, microvascular changes, and inflammatory contributions. Metabolomics, proteomics, and transcriptomics are other big systems biological approaches. Not to mention social determinants of health, which are also massive.

All that said, I'll read the book, but the "daring journalist finds a crew of whistleblowers" framing strokes me as either ignorant or disingenuous. Off-putting either way, as we face major cuts to public funding of health science, which has overall been an extremely generative and sustainable model for improving national and world health.