[cycomanic]

This is a very simplistic view. Why do believe QC departments exist? Even in an industrial setting, companies make the same thing at the same place on the same equipment after sometimes years of process optimisation of well understood technology. This is essentially a best case scenario and still results fail to reproduce. How are scientists who work at the cutting edge of technology with much smaller budgets supposed to give instructions that can be easily reproduced on first go? Moreover how are they supposed to easily reproduce other results?

That is not to say that scientist should not document the process to their best ability so it can be reproduced in principle. I'm just arguing that it is impossible to easily reproduce other people's results. Again when chemical/manufacturing companies open another location they often spend months to years to make the process work in the new factory.

[johnnyworker]

> companies make the same thing at the same place on the same equipment after sometimes years of process optimisation of well understood technology. This is essentially a best case scenario and still results fail to reproduce.

We're not talking about 1 of 10 reproduction attempts failing, we're talking about 100%. And no, companies don't time and time again try to reproduce something that has never been reproduced and fail, to then try again, endlessly. That's just not a thing.

> it is impossible to easily reproduce other people's results

We're also not talking about "easily" reproducing something, but at all. And in principle doesn't cut it, it needs to be reproduced in practice.