A review of 'Viral' by Chan and Ridley explores competing hypotheses about COVID-19's origins, critiquing institutional responses and emphasizing ongoing uncertainty. Longer summary

This book review discusses 'Viral' by Alina Chan and Matt Ridley, which explores the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. The reviewer summarizes key points from the book, including evidence for both natural and lab leak hypotheses, the history of lab leaks, the relevance of Wuhan's location, and criticisms of institutional responses. The review also covers technical evidence and debates around it, while emphasizing the reviewer's uncertainty about the pandemic's true origin. The author concludes by reflecting on the role of amateur researchers and the importance of scientific self-correction. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander partially retracts and corrects his previous findings on age gaps and birth order effects after errors were identified in his analysis. Longer summary

Scott Alexander partially retracts his previous findings on age gaps and birth order effects. He acknowledges that Bucky, a Less Wrong user, found errors in his analysis of SSC survey data. While the original conclusion about firstborn children being overrepresented in high-openness STEM types remains valid, the specific findings about age gaps were partially incorrect. Scott explains the errors, presents Bucky's corrected analysis, and discusses the implications. He emphasizes the importance of data transparency and encourages readers to double-check his work. Shorter summary