1. Not scientifically or medically feasible you say, yet somehow every decade we prove just the opposite and have done so for hundreds of years. This was meant to be a long game, not an overnight success. Ample funding would have gotten enough scientists to take the idea seriously and come up with something that would have enabled the famous 1 drop of blood tests.

2. That’s neither here, nor there. The story is global and the repercussions are equally global.

3. I don’t think the article is suggesting freedom. It merely highlights that if she ended up behind bars, so should others. And if others don’t then one must ask how is the legal system fair enough that the world still sent her to jail? The law either applies to everyone or no one, right?

4. Fake can mean a lot of different things, and more often than not, there is little to no intent of malice. What few understand, is the pressure of owning a company of that scale. Many demos will “fill in the gaps” because there is no other way to sell a product to prospective investors. Let’s not forget Holmes had a few great minds on that project who knew what they were doing. In fact, the biggest issue with the project was reliability rather than it not working at all. Classic case of a proof of concept working but struggling with getting productionised.