> Most other professions would get in real trouble if they faked and cheated with their product. I don't think this is true at all to be honest. The world is d

> Most other professions would get in real trouble if they faked and cheated with their product. I don't think this is true at all to be honest. The world is drowning in false claims of product capabilities. See these flashlights/laser pens sold on Amazon for example[0][1]. Not to mention the complete absence of punishment for corporate decision makers who openly order their staff to violate the law. There are a few professions where an individual is required to take on legal responsibility for ensuring the safety of a project or product. I think this approach generally targets the wrong participant. The onus should be on the company and the shareholders to ensure that the project/product is compliant. Shifting that burden onto an employee puts them in the position of choosing between safety and their own stability while doing nothing to curb the behaviour of the party incentivised to cut corners. > There need to be some criminal liability for faking science. But it still needs to be in a ways so you don't get in trouble for doing bad and/or wrong studies. I really don't see how criminal liability would help here. Incentivising scientists to reproduce and fact check the work of their peers seems like it would be cheaper for all but the most expensive studies and would be much more effective in actually revealing the people who are cheating. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q_0wxzClkg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q_0wxzClkg [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH3yMeA7HxQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH3yMeA7HxQ