Wait, I mean journal publishers. Publishers love their publication biases.
Edit: I just remembered it was like 16 years ago I talked about this to a mentor. They wanted a FOSS solution for all those unpublished papers, but nobody ever bothered to put in that effort. A shame, really.
10 Comments
mvirts@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 1y
Bruh you still gotta publish that unsupported hypothesis
taiyang@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 1y
Nah, academics love their publication biases.
Wait, I mean journal publishers. Publishers love their publication biases.
Edit: I just remembered it was like 16 years ago I talked about this to a mentor. They wanted a FOSS solution for all those unpublished papers, but nobody ever bothered to put in that effort. A shame, really.
match@pawb.social · 2 pts · 1y
Is there a particular journal for this
mvirts@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1y
Hmmmmm if we can sell it to AI companies....
Midnitte@beehaw.org · 16 pts · 1y
Lose interest doesn't seem to have enough connecting arrows
SaltSong@startrek.website · 3 pts · 1y
Other than that, it seems fairly accurate.
xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 1y
SaltSong@startrek.website · 5 pts · 1y
I don't see that as a problem. I can easily get caught in that loop.
xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 1y
SaltSong@startrek.website · 3 pts · 1y
Ah, I see. You are thinking about the properly structured flowchart, not the humorously true one.
Yea, fair enough.
Datorie@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 1y
Where’s the inevitable desk reject after months of work?
K4mpfie@feddit.org · 2 pts · 1y
Idk seems like the whole "write the damn paper and rework it until you're good" part is missing (It's just yet another loop of tantrum and sulk)