Coming from research land, both academic security and beyond, this seems like a misunderstanding of how the broader CS research community achieves "standing on

Coming from research land, both academic security and beyond, this seems like a misunderstanding of how the broader CS research community achieves "standing on the shoulders of giants". 1. The impetus in the academic research community is to disseminate, not hide. Likewise, most research is not considered a one-off but a progression. I highly encourage looking at writings by CS research leaders like Simon Peyton Jones and David Patterson on their approach to having shaped large areas of computer science for the last 30+ years. Reasons include improving your own understanding, improving how you present it to others, and getting others engaged. 2. There is a personal bean counting aspect that some researchers are stuck with that limits where they do the first conference publication. They care due to particulars of the promotion process, e.g., tenure, which is in turn subject to publishing rules for academic conference & journal papers around minimal publish units. None of that applies here. HOWEVER, the author is clever here! As the point is to disseminate & improve, by taking an unusual position and writing about that, they've achieved the goal. And final caveat: the non-academic security researchers are among the few that (a) has individuals making up and following personal ethics and ignoring internal review board (IRB) etc. regulations that scientists are required to follow and (b) are fearful/surprised of getting their results buried, most of the time (but not always) IMO as a result of that.