quote from OP article: >Ziani found Gino’s results implausible, and assumed that they had been heavily p-hacked. She told me, “This crowd is used to living in a world where you have enough degrees of freedom to do whatever you want and all that matters is that it works beautifully.” But an adviser strongly suggested that Ziani “build on” the paper, which had appeared in a top journal. When she expressed her doubts, the adviser snapped at her, “Don’t ever say that!” Members of Ziani’s dissertation committee couldn’t understand why this nobody of a student was being so truculent. In the end, two of them refused to sign off on her degree if she did not remove criticisms of Gino’s paper from her dissertation. One warned Ziani not to second-guess a professor of Gino’s stature in this way. In an e-mail, the adviser wrote, “Academic research is like a conversation at a cocktail party. You are storming in, shouting ‘You suck!’ ”
>Ziani complied, but her professional relationships had deteriorated, and she soon left the cocktail party for good. When she told me these stories, in a wood-panelled bar at a historic hotel in Boulder, Colorado, she covered her face to cry. Simmons told me that he could name countless people who had similar experiences. “Some people are hurt by this stuff and they don’t even know. They think they’re not good enough—‘It must be me’—so they leave the field,” he said. “That’s where I started to get angry. How many Zoés are there?”
@billiam devastating critique of academia, especially because it's using their own method to measure how little they live up to their claims. A less formal video on this topic is this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljcnSkKpSXQ