24 ms·
Presenting things that are not peer reviewed is generally considered bad science, is it not? This kind of "science" happens here on HN every day and nobody bat
by bphogan 11y ago
Presenting things that are not peer reviewed is generally considered bad science, is it not?
This kind of "science" happens here on HN every day and nobody bats an eye.
"We used XYZ framework and it's the best thing ever!"
Then tons of people use XYZ framework.
Blog posts.
Videos.
Fad happens.
Fad is over because "Why I'm switching to ABC framework."
With tons of benchmarks of course.
My point is that this happens all over the place. Someone makes a "discovery", markets the hell out of it with great speeches, bravado, etc. It gets coverage. It "grows legs" if you will. People repeat it and spread it.
The "science" part I was referring to was the part where someone else attempts and fails to repeat the initial findings.
- semi-extrinsic 11y ago> Presenting things that are not peer reviewed is generally considered bad science, is it not? Not really. Most conference presentations present stuff that's not (yet) peer reviewed. A Master's thesis is not peer reviewed. Etc. > This kind of "science" happens here on HN every day and nobody bats an eye. Sure. And bad cooking happens every day in the kitchens of many homes in the US. But when bad cooking happens in the kitchen of a Michelin star restaurant, and the cook still serves it up as gourmet food, it's a really big problem.