[j-wags]

> Do you really think that the current situation poses a >25% cost on scientific productivity? Do you think your system would be able to recapture that?

Yes and yes. I'm 6 years past defending my PhD and I have low confidence in being able to reproduce results from papers in my field (computational biophysics).

I was recently at an industry-heavy biophysics conference that ran a speed dating event, and my conversation starter was "what fraction of papers in our field do you trust?". I probably talked to ~20 people, with a median response of ~25%.

Even a tiny amount invested in reproduction studies and accountability would go a long way. Most papers in _computational_ biophysics still don't publish usable code and data.

[BenFranklin100]

It’s bad enough that too often I trust companies over academics nowadays. At the end of the day, a company has to answer to the customer. If what they offer doesn’t actually work, they go out of business. Academics often don’t have to answer to anyone. Just be smart and make the paper look good while being careful not to do something that could get you nailed for outright fraud.

[SJC_Hacker]

> If what they offer doesn’t actually work, they go out of business

If this happens before founders/early investors aren't the ones left without a chair when the music stops, it doesn't matter

See: Theranos.

[mangamadaiyan]

Actually, being answerable to the customer is not universally true.

Typically, most companies are answerable to the investors and shareholders. Customers usually don't figure in the equation.