Comments by "Samson Soturian" (@samsonsoturian6013) on "Pete Judo" channel.

  1. All academic fraud shoukd be, because there's a ton of money that comes with PhDs and academic citations
    486
  2. Historian here: I personally outed on academic paper as a fraud, but the journal in question straight up ignored me.
    82
  3. It goes to literally every competive field that the top handful get stupidly rich, even videogames and journalism. It always ends up just selling a power fantasy to the masses.
    62
  4. The incentive for peer review is to read the abstract, make suggestions for improvement, and get the street cred for involvement
    45
  5. @DeltaDaedalus  the Liberians were loaning each other money, they just don't have professional banks
    19
  6. [Laughs in Hindenburg Research]
    17
  7. That's like compensation consultants. They are well paid with the incentive to do nothing important, make minor recommendations and watch the drama unfold
    17
  8.  @Living_End  Even so, it didn't make them richer despite literal free money
    12
  9. Or just criminalize it as fraud. Technically no new laws are needed, as anyone can reasonably expect financial gain from getting published
    11
  10. A lot of them are straight up lying to avoid suspicion. Even if they aren't fraudsters, they want to be above suspicion
    11
  11. Proving academic fraud is difficult, though. Often what they're lying about are questions that science itself hasn't answered yet.
    10
  12. Having met many poor people, I can say definitely that they are all either too young to get out of poverty or they spend their money stupidly. I've met several people who spend their checks within a day of getting it
    9
  13. Can be. Depends on university and whether they were too trusting or just lazy
    8
  14. They spent tens of millions and had low four digit participants. That's better than 90% of studies and as good as anyone can get.
    8
  15. Also, a total waste of government money
    8
  16. Even without fraud that's definitely a shitty workplace
    7
  17. I can honestly say I was never fooled by the draw of prestigious colleges. No one I ever met thought you coukd get better degrees by paying 10x the amount of money. What I should have known is that the only people who are willing to go through that garbage are rich kids with more money than sense and scammers participating in a pyramid scheme.
    7
  18.  @DJVARAO  Not always. Max Plank didn't live long enough to see most of his work lead to real world inventions.
    6
  19. I think what they were trying to argue was that morality goes out the window when careers are involved... Kinda like Harvard.
    6
  20. Psychology is what gave us the term "psychobabble." Guess
    5
  21. Lose the hyperbole
    5
  22. There's a clickbait physicist on YouTube named Sabine who brought up that nonsense as her excuse why she dropped out of a PhD program. Not sure what the real reason is
    4
  23. You ain't going anywhere, Greedo
    3
  24. His opinion is irrelevant
    3
  25.  @Hexanitrobenzene  ha. You know the Liberians eat their enemies, right?
    3
  26. Historian here: AI would have no idea what I was talking about and spit out critiques that often have nothing to do with what I'm writing about. Just like the average peer reviewer
    3
  27. Some people would just be a bum
    3
  28. But that is also a form of fraud since prof's name is attached to work they didn't do
    2
  29. Because it says what we want to hear
    2
  30. Work ethic isn't genetic, it's a learned behavior
    2
  31. We need to demonitize it. No grants, no government jobs, no subsidies, no FAFSA loans. If you have something to sell you can patent it.
    2
  32. That's just fraud/embezzlement
    2
  33.  @rika8484  but you also wouldn't meet most definitions of poor
    2
  34. Lose the clickbait. We all know who the Sacklers are
    2
  35.  @UncleKennysPlace  The shitty netflix documentary which this appears to be based on them made them all look like melodrama villains. They were the baddest drug dealers, nothing more
    2
  36. Proving the fraud would be very difficult
    2
  37. Many alleged science deniers never even deny anything they simply have an opinion that egotistical bastards hate
    1
  38. Liar
    1
  39. Especially when you're looking at low-impact journals. Often there is simply no peer review at all, and I have found published articles that contradict themselves in key places as well as dismiss all relevant data with a literal conspiracy theory
    1
  40.  @ecocodex4431  you spend your money stupidly, Greedo
    1
  41. Well, there is the corporate world, but they also have fraudsters targeting Wall Street and specific classes of consumers. Government programs tend to have expensive programs that move at a snail's pace because the fraudsters will find excuses to cause delays because they don't want their programs to ever end. Just a different coat of paint on the same old junk.
    1
  42. The only rule is any metric used to measure human behavior is bull because humans will game the metric.
    1
  43. That will more than likely end soon, and the Argentine government is dirty as all hell. They once stole a whole refinery
    1
  44. Not really. There's all sorts of research papers that are published but are neither used nor read because their purpose was to get some chump a job.
    1
  45. More than we trust you
    1
  46. Shut up
    1
  47. All the studies that might impact current politics
    1
  48. He didn't f*cking say that, acchole. The implication is the results are skewed by bums and underachievers. I have met many people who spend everything within days of getting it even though they're in default on bills. With that approach to money, it doesn't matter what you're getting, you're going to be poor
    1
  49. Not really. There were 500 idiots just like this that failed
    1
  50. Historian here: We don't have an incentive to publish surprising results. For instance, one submission I sent was rejected unread because I refused to say that a particular battle was part of a wider conflict between "white men" against "indigenous peoples" because it was simply not so (the battle was between US cavalrymen and unidentified Indians in Mexican service).
    1
  51. ​@fromabove422 vhut? These Indians weren't involved in any other conflicts we're aware of and they didn't like me saying that.
    1
  52. ​ @fromabove422 the context is these were unidentified Indians in Mexican service stealing cattle from Federals
    1
  53. It's all fake
    1
  54. Dude, AI development has not been remotely rapid. It's as old as the circuit board.
    1
  55. That applies to what are basically humanities studies that pretend to be science. Namely sociology and psychology. Criminal psychology and criminal justice don't have that issue because they don't pretend to be science
    1
  56. It was just a big number she pulled from thin air
    1
  57. Not really. Recall people were adding their names to all the papers they could often without even knowing what the research was about. This egomaniac would totally be stupid enough to do that
    1
  58. No, there's no drug associated with this research, that's probably why he did it. All the perks of real world science, none of the criminal liabilities
    1
  59. That appears to be happening as we speak with record high enrollment at community colleges and trade schools and very little donations entering ivy league schools. This partially due to the state of the economy at the moment, but scandals appear to also be a factor.
    1
  60. There's no drug associated with it. The real depressing statistic is that 90% of treatments submitted for FDA approval fail. All of those treatments passed the rigors of academic and corporate approval
    1
  61. It's the same reason news outlets only talk about shocking things. They get paid per click
    1
  62. Hardeehar
    1
  63. Shut up. Get drafted
    1
  64. The science channels/magazine writers that you watch/read are getting their stuff from Frontiers and other big journals
    1
  65. Who is they? There are thousands of allegedly academic journals out there
    1
  66. Because they don't care about science, they want the fame/fortune that comes with being at the top
    1
  67. No one cares
    1
  68.  @Tuhar  this idiot doesn't know how many deadbeats there are skewing statistics
    1
  69. To show how common alluminum oxide is, it's the active ingredient in sunscreen
    1
  70. There can be harmful frauds in other fields. Historians I see are actively encouraging prejudices.
    1
  71. Given most peer to peer emails get sent to spam folders, this is the same as not providing the data
    1
  72. Science never had integrity. The snake oil scams just larger as academia did and became more frequent as we subsidized research
    1
  73. What they were arguing was ethics go out the window when careers are involved. It's like how thieves are deluded all rich people are thieves
    1
  74. It's like how everyone lies about paleotology. We don't know half as much as teachers will tell you
    1
  75. Pride/greed
    1
  76. Except that is also fraud since it isn't their work
    1
  77. Who?
    1
  78. With many it would simply be impossible because not even science knows the answer to the questions the fraudsters ask.
    1
  79. If the results support existing political rhetoric then it's fraud. I find this when reading history all the time, no further study necessary: Fraud.
    1
  80. Maybe not fraud, but just an egotistical bastard, or maybe a little of both
    1
  81. Draconian consequences don't effect behavior when enforcement is near zero
    1
  82. The potency scales you have are misleading because most opioids have the same effects but different drugs are absorbed at different rates. Fentanyl isn't stronger, it just gets absorbed instantly, you can even get high by absorbing it through your skin
    1
  83. Like you're different?
    1
  84. Not necessarily. But there's a basic assumption that is wrong: People are not writing academic papers in order to advance humanity, but to advance their careers or opinions.
    1
  85. Because institutions aren't an omnipotent being, but a group of people. Many are naive, others committed lesser sins that do not amount to fraud, others are more concerned with politics than results (most major fraudsters were DEI hires), and many are also fraudsters and don't report crimes except when they have a personal vendetta.
    1
  86. A lot of people WANT fraud to go unnoticed. It's like the Olympics, we want to entertain power fantasies about what is possible, also fraud is the only way to change demographic trends in academia
    1
  87.  @ktktktktktktkt  Some people would do that, but some people are poor because they spend money stupidly
    1
  88. Googling... There's so much stuff about his wall street bets and imposters on Facebook I can't find if that is so
    1
  89. I know without looking. Rich chumps, DEI appointees, frauds, nepo babies, and any combination thereof
    1
  90. All ivy league colleges are like that
    1
  91. Guys, all those scammers were pretending to have attended Harvard, are we surprised Harvard was full of people trying to scam their way into a degree?
    1
  92. That statement is meaningless
    1
  93. With a lot of these academics you know they're frauds just from the names. Where they're from, the facilities simply don't exist to put them in high office
    1
  94. A lot of these papers aren't too good to be true, but too obfuscated to be understood
    1
  95. Even so, you'll need something concrete to accuse him of anything
    1
  96. Shut up
    1
  97. Vhut?
    1
  98. Liars get scalped, Greedo
    1
  99. There's certainly a lot of bad science, but all broad judgments is just political bullshit
    1
  100. ​ @kablamo9999 that means nothing
    1
  101. ​ @ujubin Come on. We all know you'd say that regardless if it were true
    1
  102. *Millions
    1
  103. @TheZachary86  Exceot Einstein was a man and didn't understand all the fandom around him. Also, the professors are prestige whores too. Many of these colleges don't even need to pay for low level professors because thousands of men will teach 1-2 classes for free just so they can say they taught at that school
    1
  104. @WinstonSmithGPT  this took decades to develop
    1
  105. @TheZachary86  except Einstein himself cannot give you any better education than a no-name with the same degree.
    1
  106. There's nothing western about this shit
    1
  107. Do you have a death wish?
    1
  108. Pitch a study that examines piracy in seagulls, you won't
    1
  109. There's worse. Not in the first world, though
    1
  110. You were an unnecessary child
    1
  111. You mean where people may or may not have died due an experiment? Probably doesn't happen much, even frauds feel bad when people get hurt
    1
  112. Not always. Some of the peer reviewers out the fraud, and we never hear of it because it's never published. Some peer reviewers are just lazy, while others are successfully fooled by the fraudster.
    1