←back to thread

Publishers trial paying peer reviewers – what did they find?

(www.nature.com)
31 points xqcgrek2 | 3 comments | 29 Mar 25 19:08 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
withinboredom ◴[02 Apr 25 18:03 UTC] No.43559461[source]▶
There's this guy I usually have on in the background on youtube who replicates chemistry experiments -- or attempts to. It's pretty rare to see him find a paper that doesn't exaggerate yields or go into enough details, and he has to guess things.
replies(3): >>43559567 #>>43559623 #>>43560480 #
1. zipy124 ◴[02 Apr 25 18:15 UTC] No.43559623[source]▶
Was it perhaps "that chemist"? He has some decent videos on complete bogus papers but I don't think he does reproductions, I'd be interested in that channel if you happen to find it in your watch history.
replies(1): >>43563454 #
2. 8note ◴[03 Apr 25 00:37 UTC] No.43563454[source]▶
nileblue/red typically pulls his processes from papers that have some dubious documentation, and his results have variance with the papers'.

he's not going out of his way to reproduce papers, its just on the way of turning peanut butter into toothpaste, or something of the sorr

replies(1): >>43585489 #
3. withinboredom ◴[04 Apr 25 17:32 UTC] No.43585489[source]▶
Yep, that's the guy!