alt Hacker News> Anyone genuinely familiar with the scientific publishing process probably holds the most skepticism around publications
Healthy skepticism is a good idea
The silly notion that being published means it should be dismissed or that we should assume the opposite is true is not healthy though.
> The above view is independent of the current article. But it's embarrassing to see people praise the heck out of publications in 2026 in a vacuum. Reeks of young PhD student vibes.
I was responding to a comment above mine that said this journal was untrustworthy because of a single news bite they recalled.
I specifically said that not everything published in a journal is true!
Your condescending “young PhD student vibes” attempt at an insult is rich considering you didn’t even try to acknowledge what I actually said or the context in which I was delivering it.
Discussing anything science and research related on HN is such a slog because so many commenters are in such a rush to deliver some contrarian smug take that they’re not even reading what’s written.
> I specifically said that not everything published in a journal is true!
Yes, but the undertone of your message was towards them being generally good and useful. Which my post disagrees with. This view hardens with every new year.
The entirety of your comment just now is predicated on this one point, which is treating your words at face value, rather than their implication. To act like I didn't understand your words, let alone read them, is an insult to the both of us - notably you. Because if you believed what you had typed, you would not expect a real response from you typing it, which would make you typing it pointless in the first place.