[Serious] Generally speaking, is philosophy a worthwhile subject of study?

[polymath257]

Are you sure he was being descriptive on this point? Falsification isn't an intuitive idea. And modern science is still not set up this way—you're insensitivised to discover something new not falsify something old.

[incentivized?]

I wonder if what Popper says should be thought of more like a recommendation -- how science would work best, or how it would work if it were behaving properly.

I'm no scientist, but I've read criticism from scientists about how research actually happens these days. Nearly all of it is sponsored by the Pentagon or for-profit corporations, which have their thumbs on the scale of what the results will be. Researchers are often employed on a publish-or-perish basis, which motivates them to do research that is more likely to get published in the journals, which are also for-profit and prefer to publish the more sexy results. 

Some say this has led to a crisis of reproducibility, with not enough people willing to do the unglamorous work of falsification.

And don't forget the 'research' that is not done publicly, say in labs for various companies. Often such research is never published and never vetted by independent researchers. This is a large component of chemistry and medical research these days. It only gets published if it leads to a patent.

Yes, there are a LOT of problems with how universities have become for-profit companies and research is geared to paying the salaries of unnecessary administrators. Being able to get grant money is now the chief concern of many researchers, not actually doing the work of research. And, those wishing to be less than completely honest can do some p-hacking to get what might be considered a good paper.