Soon I think people will learn to work around it backwards, retrospectively writing the non-existent papers. This way you get a brand new paper in your CV with a citation count already above zero.
Look at the example in the article, which is a fairly typical citation: While you can replicate the title, how do you propose to retroactively publish a paper in a specific journal, in a specific volume, on a specific set of pages, potentially years in the past?
Moreover, citations are most commonly for other people's work. And since you would be more likely to catch fake citations for your own work, the proportion of those is probably greater for fake citations.
So the people who would have to accomplish this, would be an entirely different set of people than the authors who published the fake citation. These people may not even be working together regularly, but you would need to involve every named author, as journals do check this.
And what would their motivation be, to publish based on a title that is potentially nonsense? A single citation that may not even be picked up due to the inescapable differences between the fake and post-hoc real citation?
I can't imagine that anyone would find that worthwhile
I suspect one tool governments across the world will resort to when they get desperate about sub-replacement fertility is changing mandatory conscription from males to the childless. Quite strong incentive, not be sent to the meatgrinder.
It's an airplane. It is as susceptible to doors not being bolted on as much as a civilian flight. Maybe actually a higher chance of some benign mechanical issue as it is well known that air crews are often overworked with little to no sleep with the high tempo of sorties in these types of missions. Lots of historical examples of US military aircraft crashing from mechanical issues and not being shot down
At war there's a lot more pressure on ground and air crews that can lead to more mistakes. Also the mission would be flown closer to the limits vs. training.
So... We don't know? If your question is whether that's a good guess/greater than zero probability then sure. Is it a certainty? No. The Iranians will claim they shot it down. The Americans may or may not admit and if they deny then people will say they're lying.
The second option. The military dictatorship had an official censorship bureau in place. Proposed news articles had to be run through it before publishing. When some story was barred, it was usual for journal staff to fill its empty slot with something else, like poems, short stories, tall tales, et cetera, that obviously felt out of place. This way people were made aware something that should be there did not make it.
Of course we shouldn't expect a couple of years of shutdown to significantly reverse 200 years of man-made atmospheric CO2 accumulation, but surely it would help stop the problem to get worse if the widespread WFH effort were sustained after the pandemic.
reply