Open Menu
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
lotide
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
Login

Real Talk

⁨516⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨fossilesque@mander.xyz⁩ to ⁨science_memes@mander.xyz⁩

https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/5d95091b-bfeb-47d9-9448-5621c9c12b8b.jpeg

source

Comments

Sort:hotnewtop
  • Eq0@literature.cafe ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Once, I got a reviewer stating “in the code, I doubt line 43 was supposed to be submitted”

    Line 43: FUUUCK, DOES NOT WORK

    source
    • OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I’m amazed a reviewer read the code.

      source
      • Eq0@literature.cafe ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Me too! That wasn’t even the inly time I got comments on my code. Since then, I make a point of doing at least a cursory check on codes when I review as well

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Did it work though?

      source
      • Eq0@literature.cafe ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Yes. Yes, everything works a-okay. Somehow I fixed the code but never removed the obnoxious, full cap comment…

        source
  • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    That’s why you always prefix your todos with “TODO”

    source
    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      To-do: add TODO

      source
    • BluJay320@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Only in Kansas

      source
    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      todo, todo, todo todo todo, todo todooooo
      tododododooo

      source
  • Sergio@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Best case scenario:

    • The initial submission didn't cite the crappy Gabor paper, and peer reviewers said that it should.
    • The peer editor, summarizing feedback, said that the submission was accepted as long as it took into account the peer reviewer suggested revisions.
    • The submitters don't really care about the paper quality, all they need is the citation. So they assigned the revisions to the lowliest grad student.
    • The lowliest grad student knows their advisor hates that crapmaster Gabor, so when they sent it to their advisor they asked whether they should cite that paper, thinking they might prefer to passive-aggressively "forget" to do so
    • The advisor doesn't care about the paper quality (see above) so they just skimmed it and saw the word "Gabor". (alternate hypothesis: they thought this was a great opportunity to troll that crap-merchant Gabor, as well as those useless middlemen thieves at Wiley.)
    • The peer editor: same as the advisor, they're just doing this for a line-item on their CV.
    • The Wiley "editor" doesn't even read the paper, they just forward it to the typesetter subcontractors and demand that the submitters pay up.
    • The typesetter subcontractors don't care, it's all just text to them.
    • And so it becomes Science, and the writer of crappy papers Gabor is enshrined in the pantheon along with Ea-Nasir and William "I'm something of a scientist myself" Dafoe. Immortality, of a sorts.
    source
    • Microw@piefed.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Worst case scenario:

      The peer reviewer is Gabor.

      source
      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Best Case Scenario:

        Gabor agrees the paper was crap

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        If your reviewer suggests you cite another paper, it’s one of their papers and they just doxed themselves, 100% of the time.

        source
  • Usernamealreadyinuse@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    retractionwatch.com/…/overly-honest-references-sh…

    Awesome, it was published but retracted

    source
  • Contramuffin@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    That’s why you change the color of any temporary text so that you can really see if there’s any left

    source
    • Eq0@literature.cafe ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Considering how widespread of a situation it is, I am surprised I haven’t found yet a good LaTeX package that handles temporary sections

      source
      • howrar@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        You don’t need a package at all. I just define a new command \xxx{stuff} that changes the colour to red. It’s a one-liner. Copy and paste that into any new document. Changing the colour without a custom command is equally trivial, but this allows you to search for “xxx” to find anything you might’ve missed.

        source
      • grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        why not add notes as marginalia?

        source
    • Zwiebel@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      ####I throw some hashes in front

      source
      • Eq0@literature.cafe ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I throw ?? (that is also the default error code for LaTeX, so the last sweep of the pdf is always a search for ??)

        source
  • ryedaft@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    OOP really overestimating how many people read a paper. It’s about publishing as many papers as possible, not proofreading.

    source
    • HiddenLychee@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      If I found all my reviewers paid this little attention I would contact the editors and demand new ones lmao

      source
      • ryedaft@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        So you don’t think editors send out complete garbage that they should have rejected themselves?

        source
        • -> View More Comments
  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    At least it wasn’t AI

    source
    • stelelor@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      My thought sas well! I’d rather stumble upon this than shit like “vegetative electron miscroscopy”.

      source
  • Postimo@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Vibes science?

    source