The jokes write themselves...

Comments

• Paragone@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ 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
• dharmacurious@slrpnk.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ 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 ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Isn’t that the joke ?

    source

    • Klear@quokk.au ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Yes! Finally a comment that explained it!

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

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

  source
• Silic0n_Alph4@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

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

  source

  • beejboytyson@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Hitler never had the making of a variety city athlete

    source
  • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    they’re not taking any chances

    source
• afromustache@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Had this article pop up in my news feed last week or smth like that

  If you read it you will notice the absurdly named Hitler Louis has a partner named Innocent Benjamin lmfao. It reads like satire.

  source
• U7826391786239@piefed.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  he’s ripe for a great career with openai

  source

  • sepi@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Grok

    source

    • OwOarchist@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Can’t sign in to xitter. Username already taken.

      source
• Grimy@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

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

  source
• flandish@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ 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 ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ 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    When somebody publishes a bullshit paper that is eventually withdrawn, every subsequent paper citing the fraudulent work can also be withdrawn as being unreliable.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

    • Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      When somebody publishes a bullshit paper that is eventually withdrawn, every subsequent paper citing the fraudulent work can also be withdrawn as being unreliable.

      It depends on how foundational it is, of course. If you could swap it for a dozen other papers, nobody cares. If you’re continuing the work from a retracted paper, you’re fucked (but then, you probably would have noticed some errors pretty soon anyway).

      I have a friend who basically ran a series of experiments based on a paper that was complete bullshit. And like any good biochemist, he figured he was screwing up, or the equipment was faulty, or the substrate was more cursed than usual. Lucky for him, after weeks of smashing into a brick wall of failure, he started asking other people, who also kept failing and then they figured it out.

      source
    • flandish@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      makes sense! thanks for the reply.

      source
• drewaustin@piefed.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  What’s the high score for retractions?

  source

  • ICastFist@programming.dev ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Aiming for the Guiness, I guess

    source
• kerrigan778@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  By leaderboard do they mean the “Bad Hitlers” leaderboard? Cus he’s not at the top sure, but on the board I can believe.

  source