3 ms·

-- from reading - the problem was there are no imaging experts - so basically all images in scientific publications are not scrutinized for photoshop - good thi

• mwt 4y ago
  > basically all images in scientific publications are not scrutinized for photoshop This was (mostly) true back then, but it is definitely not true today. People tempted to commit fraud now have to be worried about people like Elisabeth Bik exposing them and ruining their careers. In my experience, the type of people known lie in papers overlap strongly with those that are career-minded/money-driven. So having a few journalists with the skills to detect fraud is an obvious win. Some of the frauds will just get better at, that's just how it does, but it's not like there are no imaging experts in the field.
  • BurningFrog 4y ago
    So the frauds of today are done in smarter ways. Maybe they will be discovered with new tools developed in a few decades.
    • mwt 4y ago
      Hopefully so, but there will probably always be a back-and-forth between frauds and journalists in the same way security is always a competition. At least the easy frauds are more likely to be caught today.
• origin_path 4y ago
  That's not really the problem. There are many ways to fake papers and there's no guarantee that a Photoshopped image is detectable just by looking at it. The problem is that somehow researchers managed to get hundreds of millions of dollars, entire labs, and 15+ years of research on the back of a study that presumably nobody ever tried to replicate, nor did they notice that the claims weren't true even when building new research on top of it. That's the problem and it is frankly very hard to understand how it's possible.