Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 123 posts

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#71

Post by sparsely »

Validark wrote: post #29

“[s]cientific controversies must be settled by the methods of science rather than by the methods of litigation” Boom. And the researchers didn't accuse a person of fabrication, they accused the data of being fabricated.

Courts have had little hesitation to decide these matters themselves for a long time - check out "Bite Mark Analysis" or any number of trials involving medical evidence. While I do think that they need to consider scientific matters they are vastly overconfident in the conclusions reached.

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#72

Post by andrelaszlo »

> To believe that the Original data are fake and the Posted data are real, you’d have to believe that the sensible data are fake and the backwards data are real. That is a difficult thing to believe.

> We were right about how the data were altered, Gino’s prevailing explanation for the alterations does not make sense, and yet we are the defendants in this case.

What's the academic term for "mic drop"?

https://datacolada.org/118

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#73

Post by andrelaszlo »

andrelaszlo wrote: post #72

> To believe that the Original data are fake and the Posted data are real, you’d have to believe that the sensible data are fake and the backwards data are real. That is a difficult thing to believe. > We were right about how the data were altered, Gino’s prevailing explanation for the alterations does not make sense, and yet we are the defendants in this case. What's the academic term for "mic drop"? https://datacol…

This analysis is simple but brilliant. Some rows appeared out of order. They changed them back to what they should be according to their position, then checked the effects on the distributions:

https://datacolada.org/111

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#74

Post by TrackerFF »

apwheele wrote: post #13

While a favorable ruling for the Data Colada defendants seemed incredibly likely in the end (and of course being dismissed pre-trial before discovery is a good thing). But it still took over a year, and consisted of several pre-trial hearings with multiple back and forths between them. If I ctrl-f https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.259... I see Pyle (their lawyer) listed 11 times. All the motion…

I’m not familiar with civil court in the US, but wouldn’t the plaintiff have to cover the legal expenses of the defendant, if the defendant is cleared? Or similar rulings.

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#75

Post by oefrha »

smcin wrote: post #25
bluGill wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the uk at least truth is not defense againts defamation. Beware if you live there.

My own post here [0] got suddenly multiply downvoted and flagged, even though I wrote it very carefully and double-checked every single statement. Truth defense. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41526702

TL;DRs are frowned upon on HN because HN encourages people to read the article (especially before commenting) rather than Don’t Read the article.[1] You’re further breaking guidelines by complaining about votes.

That said, your comment isn’t a summary of the article at all.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12667459

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#77

Post by yard2010 »

teractiveodular wrote: post #44
rfw300 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, they were able to raise quite a bit of money (>$300K) on GoFundMe: https://www.gofundme.com/f/uhbka-support-data-coladas-legal-...

From the page: At present, Leif, Joe, and Uri do not have pro bono representation. The lawyers they’ve spoken to currently estimate that their defense could cost anywhere between $50,000 and $600,000 (depending on how far the lawsuit progresses).

That's scary, really. Having no money for this means you can't afford to fight these criminal crooks. Is this how this works in europe too?

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#78

Post by yard2010 »

TrackerFF wrote: post #74
apwheele wrote: post #13

While a favorable ruling for the Data Colada defendants seemed incredibly likely in the end (and of course being dismissed pre-trial before discovery is a good thing). But it still took over a year, and consisted of several pre-trial hearings with multiple back and forths between them. If I ctrl-f https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.259... I see Pyle (their lawyer) listed 11 times. All the motion…

I’m not familiar with civil court in the US, but wouldn’t the plaintiff have to cover the legal expenses of the defendant, if the defendant is cleared? Or similar rulings.

Even if it is, it happens months or years later, with today's interest rates you would still end up with a debt unless you have the capital. I'm not even talking about the emotional toll and stress, especially when you're the good guy, just have to prove it..

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#79

Post by progbits »

Simon_ORourke wrote: post #56

So what happens with these costs - surely the failed litigant should shoulder some if not all of the costs of defending this defamation claim?

Sadly it doesn't work like that but even that wouldn't be fair. If you lose the defamation as the plaintiff you should be forced to pay the full amount you were suing for to the defendant. Or even a multiple of that.

Re: Data sleuths who spotted research misconduct cleared of defamation

#80

Post by Mkengine »

yard2010 wrote: post #77
teractiveodular wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the page: At present, Leif, Joe, and Uri do not have pro bono representation. The lawyers they’ve spoken to currently estimate that their defense could cost anywhere between $50,000 and $600,000 (depending on how far the lawsuit progresses).

That's scary, really. Having no money for this means you can't afford to fight these criminal crooks. Is this how this works in europe too?

No, where I live (Germany) you usually have a legal insurance to cover this. The costs are around 30€ per month in my case.
Post reply on HN