3 ms·
As a research IT professional, this is our everyday. Not sure why it justifies an article in Nature, but cool to see some exposure.
by secabeen 5y ago
As a research IT professional, this is our everyday. Not sure why it justifies an article in Nature, but cool to see some exposure.
- eru 5y agoI guess it's good to have some mundane article in Nature. Because otherwise Nature mostly attracts high profile papers, that means that articles in Nature are more likely to be wrong than articles in other journals. (Interesting findings are more likely to be wrong.)
- Fomite 5y agoI think the idea is to highlight this problem - especially as more and more labs have complex machinery with a PC as an essential component of it. And that this task is often not the responsibility of a research IT professional, but a puzzled grad student.
- ironmagma 5y agoA lot of people will not believe something is real unless there’s an article that can be cited about it. So I guess it helps for when someone demands a source.
- fsh 5y agoOnly the back half of nature magazine contains scientific papers. The front half is articles like this one that are meant for a general audience. That part part is surprisingly readable and often quite interesting.
- op00to 5y agoIt’s a huge problem, and only getting worse. It contributes to the problem of non-repeatability in science. Also the inability to fix stuff by throwing money at it was one of the reasons I left research computing.
- unethical_ban 5y agoI'm not sure why it doesn't justify an article in Nature.