The first is the rape and murder case of Didi rider;
Second, Liu was accused of sexual assault;
The third is the handling of Han Chunyu's confession.
Three seemingly unrelated things, but let me see the maw of capital behind the incident, eating people and not spitting bones.
There is a saying in the Tao Te Ching: "Heaven and earth are ruthless, and everything is a grass dog; Saints are ruthless and treat people like dogs. " Lao Tzu means that heaven and earth do not distinguish between likes and dislikes, and treat them equally, regardless of good or bad; Saints treat people equally, and everyone is the same, regardless of good or bad. What I want to say today is: "Capital is ruthless, and society is a dog." Capital has nothing to do with people and society. There is only one purpose of capital, and that is profit. It is precisely because of this neutrality of capital that we need to be awed and vigilant about capital and prevent it from doing evil.
One: Didi hitchhiking rape and murder case. The ins and outs of the case are already very clear from a large number of online materials, so I won't go into details in this article. What is worth discussing is that this case occurred three months after the case of "Didi Shunfeng killed the flight attendant", which is the day after the vehicle was complained. What makes Didi so inefficient? What is the reason for Didi customer service to remain indifferent and indifferent when it is learned that passengers' lives are in extreme danger? Of course, there are personal quality and sensitivity of customer service; There is something wrong with the customer service process, but more seriously, I see the arrogance of capital and the ruthlessness of capital. In the eyes of capital, you can get a free ride to kill a flight attendant. This kind of thing is a case, and it is the murderer's personal moral corruption and heinous crime; Didi just provides a convenient travel platform. It happened that this man picked up the stewardess on the platform and killed him. If you don't pick up the flight attendant with Didi platform, he may kill others by other means; To say the least, it's also your flight attendant's bad luck. She should have bullets. If she takes another car instead of Didi, she may be killed. Didi, this is so wrong. With such a large base, similar things will happen according to probability. When it happens, Didi can only blame himself for bad luck and losing money. Therefore, based on this understanding, Didi Company did not make any rectification at all after the "flight attendant case", and even the positioning propaganda of the ride had a sexual hint of "about guns". The general manager of the amusement facility also publicly claimed that the amusement facility was a very sexy scene. Based on this understanding, it led to the indifference of customer service, the bloody statement of "You die, I will pay for it" after Yueqing incident, and the reluctant apology statement of late executives.
Second, accused of sexually assaulting Liu. The truth of this case has not come out yet. Online said there was no sexual assault, Liu was just framed. (2) There was a fact of sexual assault, but the "price" was not negotiated, and then it was negotiated, which led to the situation of being arrested and released. In the view of Quanrun Jiangnan, whether it is ① or ②; The ugly face of capital is the same. If (1) is the truth, then the people who framed Liu Zhiren are the capital wrestling with him, and they tear each other for the benefit. Beware of the ugliness of capital; If (2) is true, then under the premise of drawing lessons from the past abroad (the Australian incident a few years ago), Liu is still so bold that he can't control JB and his wife, children and mother-in-law. It only shows that it is generally fake here, and I don't know what it will be like in China. Personally, I still tend to believe Liu because such behavior is stupid, and Liu is definitely not a fool. If it really happens, it is unscrupulous and confident that he can "get it", so it is reasonable to suspect that he is a recidivist. This is not the first time. Capital will corrode people's hearts, so we should be wary of capital deceiving people's hearts and humanity.
Third, the handling of Han Chunyu's conviction. I don't think the attention of this matter is as high as the first two, because it is an academic issue and has been delayed for too long. Specific disposal opinions, please ask Du Niang next door. Personal identification conclusion: On the evening of August 3, 2065438, Kloc-0, Hebei University of Science and Technology announced the investigation and handling results of Han Chunyu's team's retraction, saying that no subjective fraud was found by Han Chunyu's team. There is no basis for republishing the retracted papers. According to the regulations, the honorary title of Han Chunyu will be cancelled, the scientific research projects undertaken by Han Chunyu team will be terminated and the scientific research funds will be recovered, and the scientific research performance award won by Han Chunyu team will be recovered. Among them, I am most concerned about and think the most critical one is that "Han Chunyu's team has not found any subjective fraud", and Han Chunyu was not killed with a stick.
Many academics may think that Han Chunyu is an academic fraud, and the investigation conclusion also says that the article has no basis for re-publication. You are not an academic in the south of the Yangtze River, and you have never followed the truth of the investigation. Why support South Korea and write conviction articles? First of all, I don't want to write a conviction article or support anyone. First, the incident investigation team has reached a stage conclusion that I have no right or ability to reverse the case for it; Second, I am a grass-roots person with just enough waist for my own use. For the time being, I don't have much power to support anyone.
The scholar wants to ask me again, then what are you doing here? I'm not demanding, I just want to talk about another possibility of the incident.
Back to Han Chunyu's recovery.
201on may 2nd, June, Han Chunyu, as a correspondent, published a research paper entitled "DNA-guided genome editing by using natural genome gregoryiargonaute" in Nature Biotechnology (34,768–773, 2065 438+June), claiming to have invented ——NgAgo-gDNA.
On August 3rd, 20 17, Nature-Biotechnology issued a statement saying that it withdrew the paper published by Han Chunyu's team on May 2nd, 20 16.
On the evening of August 3, 2065438, Kloc-0, Hebei University of Science and Technology announced the investigation and handling results of Han Chunyu's team's retraction, saying that Han Chunyu's team had not been found to be subjectively fraudulent.
As we all know, scientific research has always been a bold assumption and careful verification. Is Han Chunyu just because "Han Chunyu only did the former and the latter didn't work hard enough"? You know, once Han Faming's gene editing technology is proved to be feasible, the benefits involved will be calculated in trillions of dollars. In the face of such huge interests, which capital can sit still?
Han's method should be feasible in theory, otherwise it is impossible to publish an article. You should know that it is Nature magazine, and there are more than one reviewer, and they are all real industry giants. It is impossible to publish something that is meaningless in theory. Since this technology is in the field of life science, I wonder if it is possible that some experimental conditions that Han didn't notice played a key role, which led to the conclusion of this paper. When Han repeated the experiment, the situation changed and the expected test results could not be obtained. One day, the experimental conditions are taken seriously and can be done again.
In the words of friends who are engaged in genetic research, the existing genetic technology is simply a piece of garbage compared with Han's genetic scissors. If China owns the patent of this technology, we will even seize the peak and take the lead in the world life science field. Although Han later withdrew his paper, many scientists, research institutes and enterprises in the field of life sciences around the world did not give up proving and improving this method and devoted themselves to research.
I think if we do this method again after a while and it proves feasible, how should we write the history of science The benefits are too great, especially the Chu Jian case of Zhejiang University. We must be careful. We don't know whether there is some kind of capital behind all kinds of articles condemning Han Chunyu on the Internet today. It is prudent for the investigation team to reach this conclusion. Without killing Han Yibo, he gave a chance. After all, it is scientific research, let alone groundbreaking research, without any twists and turns. If this method is proved one day, I believe we have applied for 10,000 patents, and the situation will only be solved if we China people drill the condom and pay the ticket.
Han is a talented person, and sometimes it is more important to ask questions and solve problems. In his case, we may need some patience. ...