[gyuserbti]

This standard sentiment seems to me to be a machiavellian justification for the status quo and for not trying to improve anything. The costs of the problems are the problem, not whether they are eventually resolved extremely ineffiently.

[igorkraw]

Yes, we can improve things, but it is important to recognise that the scientific method and process is the best thing we have right now to figure this stuff out. Making it more open and reliable (open acces by default, data and code publication by default,more funding options that encourage public participation and replication studies etc.) is definitely possible but the core is not rotten. Especially some private interests (oligarchs and those with that ambition, "race realists" etc.) like to push the meme that something is fundamentally broken with publicly funded science and we shouldn't trust those ivory tower academics - often because those academics are actually able to go for the truth instead of following the market (i.e. create disinformation). This is what I'm pushing back against

[galangalalgol]

Those oligarchs and race realists have supporters within academia, when selecting the reforms for academic process, this should be considered. Also, acknowledging the core truth these people build their lies around is fundamental to dismissing the whole ball of infectious meme.