alt Hacker NewsThat applies to absolutely everyone. Convenient results are highlighted, inconvenient are either not mentioned or de-emphasized. You do have to be well read in the field to see what the authors _aren't_ saying, that's one of the purposes of being well-read in the first place. That is also why 100% of science reporting is basically disinformation - journalists are not equipped with this level of nuanced understanding.
Replies
mmooss • last Thursday at 5:26 AM
> That applies to absolutely everyone.
Eating, drinking, sleeping apply to absolutely everyone. Deception varies greatly by person and situation. I know people who are painfully honest and people I don't trust on anything, and many in between.
yes, but google has a long history of being egregious, with the additional detail that their work is often irreproducible for technical reasons (rather than being irreproducible for missing methods). For example, we published an excellent paper but nobody could reproduce it because at the time, nobody else had a million spare cores to run MD simulations of proteins.