Re:What happens when scientists admit error
by darkerside on Sunday April 26, 2020 @01:09AM
(#22984649)
I think that underplays the difficulty of the work being done here. Or maybe it just underestimates the amount of luck involved. The downside is clearly greater than the upside. Why would you even imply the opposite?
Re:What happens when scientists admit error
by Thorrez on Sunday April 26, 2020 @02:52AM
(#22985125)
I don't fully understand the relation between the difficulty of the work, the luck involved, and upside vs downside. I don't even know what you mean by the "downside", is that the downside of making the mistake, or the downside of not making the mistake?
I'm saying the downside of making the mistake (for her) might be larger than the upside of making the mistake. I don't think that's obviously wrong.
But my real main point is that speculation of this kind (in either direction) isn't very productive.
Re:What happens when scientists admit error
by darkerside on Sunday April 26, 2020 @12:37PM
(#22988293)
You're right that there is an opportunity cost here, and that it may be underestimated by most people, but you just can't give people much imaginary credit for things they might have done.
On the other hand, if she hadn't wasted her time on this useless study she might have done more useful studies and her career would be better than it is right now. She might have gotten even better grants if she hadn't made this error, and maybe fewer other people would have gotten grants. Maybe those other people being more careful helped them rather than hurt them.
I don't see how speculating like this is very useful.