Open Menu
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
lotide
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
Login

The jokes write themselves...

⁨130⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨fossilesque@mander.xyz⁩ to ⁨science_memes@mander.xyz⁩

https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/41901412-f188-4f87-b41f-cb1042f221c9.jpeg

source

Comments

Sort:hotnewtop
  • Silic0n_Alph4@lemmy.world ⁨34⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

    I wonder how retracting a man’s papers compares to rejecting him from art school?

    source
  • Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    I mean, he’s bad, but he’s not Hitler

    source
  • dharmacurious@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Now, I’m aware that I’m on the science memes comm right now, and that you’re all much smarter and more enlightened and mature and shit.

    But that dudes name is hitler and not one of you has said a word about it, and I find that very disappointing.

    source
    • BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Isn’t that the joke ?

      source
  • Paragone@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I think that Retraction Watch needs to do an institution leaderboard, to highlight which are the most, & least, corrupt institutions, because corruption’s a cultural thing, not merely an individual-thing.

    _ /\ _

    source
  • Grimy@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Put this guy on suicide watch and keep him away from his niece.

    source
  • flandish@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    curious - as i have only worked in the data pipeline side of research and cohort generation - is it not ok for a researcher to cite their prior work if said work is post peer review?

    source
    • The_v@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      It’s normal to cite your own work if the new paper is a continuation of that research. A references or three is normal and expected.

      When somebody publishes a bullshit paper that is eventually withdrawn, every subsequent paper citing the fraudulent work can also be withdrawn as being unreliable.

      A sign it’s all bullshit is when you see the majority of the citations for the paper from the same author. This usually doesn’t pass peer review anymore. In hyperspecialized fields with few researchers, they commonly get a little creative on the introduction section to include other authors.

      source
      • flandish@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        makes sense! thanks for the reply.

        source
  • U7826391786239@piefed.zip ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    he’s ripe for a great career with openai

    source
    • sepi@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Grok

      source