5 ms·

>it's a big deal if a bunch of academics are spending time working on the wrong things At the risk of sounding a little prickly with my comment - isn't it a li

>it's a big deal if a bunch of academics are spending time working on the wrong things At the risk of sounding a little prickly with my comment - isn't it a little presumptuous to write off a certain amount of research as "wrong"? There are plenty of examples of research that didn't have a clear purpose leading to breakthroughs - safety glass, microwave ovens, and Teflon all spring to mind. Also, focusing on efficiency doesn't really align with academia's purpose, which (to my mind) has more to do with fundamental research. This article about Xerox PARC springs to mind: http://www.fastcodesign.com/3046437/5-steps-to-recreate-xerox-parcs-design-magic-from-the-guy-who-helped-make-it http://www.fastcodesign.com/3046437/5-steps-to-recreate-xero...

knughit 11y ago
Matt is talking about academic who publish papers showing that System X is Y% better than System Z, under completely nonsensical conditions. They aren't advancing the state of the art, they are mapping the terrain of the compost heap, but don't realize it.
- mcguire 11y ago
  Is he? Maybe he should have said that.
kevan 11y ago
I understood that as more of a lament that a lot of work is being duplicated because academics aren't aware of prior work in the industry. But then again, how are you supposed to know that someone has a solution unless they tell the world about it in a publication? > It drives me insane to see papers that claim that some problem is "unsolved" when most of the industry players have already solved it, but they didn't happen to write an NSDI or SIGCOMM paper about it.
- sanderjd 11y ago
  There are more ways to "publish" work than in academic publications. I'm not sure to what extent it is unrealistic to expect academics to be keeping up with what is going on at industry conferences or on github or by talking to people at user groups or wherever, but the reality will always be that academic publications are not the only, or the most up-to-date, source of information.
  - kevan 11y ago
    Agreed, blog posts and open source projects can be just as helpful as journal-published articles. I didn't intend publications to mean only academic journals.
    - sanderjd 11y ago
      I didn't think that's what you intended, but in the quote you included, the author is specifically lamenting the lack of knowledge of things published outside academic journals, not the lack of knowledge of things that aren't published anywhere.
    - Scarblac 11y ago
      The problem is that many academics are not aware of anything outside the academic journals, and thus work on "unsolved" problems that already have well known solutions in industry.
mdwelsh 11y ago
That's a fair point. I'm trying to draw a distinction between "speculative" research (which might pan out long term) and "industry-focused" research (which tries to solve problems we have today). My concern is not with speculative research -- that's great -- but rather flawed industry-focused research: making incorrect assumptions, failing to deal with the general case, not considering real-world constraints.
- incepted 11y ago
  > making incorrect assumptions If it was easy to know when you make incorrect assumptions, nobody would.
  - mdwelsh 11y ago
    Well, the whole point of my post is to give some tips on how not to.
- s986s 11y ago
  Honestly, if the academics didnt choose their research the private industry wouldnt have to hire r and d. This sounds more of a ploy to save costs by having academics build for the industry on government money than to hire people to further a companies interests.
- gradstudent 11y ago
  > but rather flawed industry-focused research: making incorrect assumptions, failing to deal with the general case, not considering real-world constraints. I find this point rather condescending. What you term "incorrect assumptions" are often necessary simplifications that reveal the core of the problem at hand. The point is to try and understand what makes problems hard and to develop new ways of solving them; not to deliver to companies like Google ready-made solutions that cater to their every operational need. Don't like that? Too bad. Fund your own research.
  - mdwelsh 11y ago
    No, I mean incorrect assumptions. It doesn't matter if we're talking research in industry or academia; doing research based on flawed (not simplifying) assumptions is bad science.

knughit 11y ago

Matt is talking about academic who publish papers showing that System X is Y% better than System Z, under completely nonsensical conditions. They aren't advancing the state of the art, they are mapping the terrain of the compost heap, but don't realize it.

mcguire 11y ago
Is he? Maybe he should have said that.

kevan 11y ago

I understood that as more of a lament that a lot of work is being duplicated because academics aren't aware of prior work in the industry. But then again, how are you supposed to know that someone has a solution unless they tell the world about it in a publication? > It drives me insane to see papers that claim that some problem is "unsolved" when most of the industry players have already solved it, but they didn't happen to write an NSDI or SIGCOMM paper about it.

sanderjd 11y ago
There are more ways to "publish" work than in academic publications. I'm not sure to what extent it is unrealistic to expect academics to be keeping up with what is going on at industry conferences or on github or by talking to people at user groups or wherever, but the reality will always be that academic publications are not the only, or the most up-to-date, source of information.
- kevan 11y ago
  Agreed, blog posts and open source projects can be just as helpful as journal-published articles. I didn't intend publications to mean only academic journals.
  - sanderjd 11y ago
    I didn't think that's what you intended, but in the quote you included, the author is specifically lamenting the lack of knowledge of things published outside academic journals, not the lack of knowledge of things that aren't published anywhere.
  - Scarblac 11y ago
    The problem is that many academics are not aware of anything outside the academic journals, and thus work on "unsolved" problems that already have well known solutions in industry.

mdwelsh 11y ago

That's a fair point. I'm trying to draw a distinction between "speculative" research (which might pan out long term) and "industry-focused" research (which tries to solve problems we have today). My concern is not with speculative research -- that's great -- but rather flawed industry-focused research: making incorrect assumptions, failing to deal with the general case, not considering real-world constraints.

incepted 11y ago
> making incorrect assumptions If it was easy to know when you make incorrect assumptions, nobody would.
- mdwelsh 11y ago
  Well, the whole point of my post is to give some tips on how not to.
s986s 11y ago
Honestly, if the academics didnt choose their research the private industry wouldnt have to hire r and d. This sounds more of a ploy to save costs by having academics build for the industry on government money than to hire people to further a companies interests.
gradstudent 11y ago
> but rather flawed industry-focused research: making incorrect assumptions, failing to deal with the general case, not considering real-world constraints. I find this point rather condescending. What you term "incorrect assumptions" are often necessary simplifications that reveal the core of the problem at hand. The point is to try and understand what makes problems hard and to develop new ways of solving them; not to deliver to companies like Google ready-made solutions that cater to their every operational need. Don't like that? Too bad. Fund your own research.
- mdwelsh 11y ago
  No, I mean incorrect assumptions. It doesn't matter if we're talking research in industry or academia; doing research based on flawed (not simplifying) assumptions is bad science.