PIs often have no idea what people in their group are actually working on. They may at times just give a general direction of what research should be about. It is common for people doing research for a company to list the CTO or whatever relevant figure as author. The fact that you do not do it reveals nothing regarding the fact that this is quite common practice.

He paid for the research. While I do agree, this is very common in academia. The PI will most often be last author even if he didn’t read the paper.

Why would that be? He’s probably just the last author of a bunch of valid articles published by his employees. He probably did not take part in the ideation or writing of those articles, but that is quite common in academia as well.

I am convinced editors got the joke and now shuffle reviewers around just so that the worst one is reviewer 2.

Me: oh it’s a reaction scheme, so they start with this and end up with this. I’ll assume everything in the middle is correct and they get what I asked them.

Ah, shops where I go are not even able to tell whether the beer I’m drinking while shopping is mine or I stole from the shop. Though, they do annoy me when they say I should have left it outside. They do annoy me a lot.

The main reason I use git is it allows me to make mistakes without hard consequences. Any fuckup is just one reset away from being fixed. I like to: I have to fix this thing. While attempting to fix it I discover there is another thing that needs fixing on which everything revolves. I fix the second thing and commit. I’m now free to fuck around the code all I want and I’m sure I won’t lose that fix.

For this I really like to use --fixup when I find out the change was not completely right or does not fit well with some other changes I need to do. I really like git absorb which automates this a bit.