[image] Why is it reliable to use open source packages for research? Nowadays peer review has been rendered effectively worthless because nobody can check your codes to see if a simulation or analysis was performed correctly. Can’t confirm this. Not in our scientific area. Typically, if you pu…

1st. when people talk about a system, we generalize to an abstract idea, such as peer review and science for example. Its not “unspecific”. Would you say to an epistimologist that he/she is “unspecific”? 2nd. I reported some of my experience in physics, more spefically astrophysics/general relativ…

[image] svretina: Is this specific enough for your taste? No, I don’t think so. But I withdraw because I could not, in any case, check if anything is wrong with some papers :wink: How many people are out there who could peer review in depth? Probably not a hundred. Reproducing those calculati…

Deviating from what already is an offtopic, sorry [image] Why is it reliable to use open source packages for research? [image] svretina: Scientists themselves are doing the peer review for free No, they don’t. They do it typically in their own field of research with a purpose: Keeping qua…

[image] Eben60: sure they couldn’t have any influence onto my salary nobody said this. We are part of a scientific system and one part is peer review. Our publications are peer reviewed by somebody, thus improving quality. And so do we. It’s part of the job. Therefor it’s not for free. It di…

[image] oheil: These are typically found I can only say the dark figure by definition concerns only those which are “typically” never found. I could tell one concrete story I got from an insider (and I knew personally all participants), but that’s off topic here, and I expect you just to dis…

[image] Eben60: I expect you just to dismiss it as you dismissed svretina I dismissed nobody. I argue against some implications these general statements imply and which are in my opinion just wrong. And I try to do this in a non-general explicit way. And it’s not off topic: “Why is it reliab…

[image] oheil: This “science nowadays…” bullshit is just wrong. [image] Why is it reliable to use open source packages for research? I dismissed nobody. I argue against some implications these general statements imply and which are in my opinion just wrong. And I try to do this in a non-ge…

Yes, using strong words is wrong. Sorry for this and apologies if this dismissed @svretina and you.

[image] oheil: The people in the lab don’t rely on their pipettes, no, they calibrate them regularly and validate them regularly because proper concentrations are important. Is this something new and surprising? No, it’s just standard. You do believe that? My experiences (as a person in the l…

Arguing about sloppy science

Offtopic

Eben60 May 10, 2024, 11:39am 20

Sorry, the problem was again my deficient English. Obviously you used the definite article, meaning just this one specific lab, not a typical scientific lab, as I wrongly assumed.

Topic		Replies	Views
Why is it reliable to use open source packages for research? Offtopic package	41	3423	May 12, 2024
The board of NeuroImage resigns: Academics should pay attention Offtopic academia	19	1223	May 19, 2023
Keeping scientific objectivity and details in benchmark reports Community question	56	5180	June 28, 2021
Why Julia - A Manifesto Community	38	5717	December 7, 2023
Julia losing popularity among Data Science users (KDnuggets Software Poll) Community	146	20696	June 23, 2018

Arguing about sloppy science

Related topics