Implying that the original poster's blog post is going to be lowering the SNR of the Internet is a really shitty thing to say. There are four options: 1. This

Implying that the original poster's blog post is going to be lowering the SNR of the Internet is a really shitty thing to say. There are four options: 1. This is a truly novel. The author writes a blog post. 2. This is not novel. The author finds some prior art, and writes a blog post about his own work but referencing the earlier work. 3. This is not novel. The author doesn't find out, and writes a blog post. Someone possibly responds pointing them to the relevant prior art. 4. This is not novel. The author finds the earlier research, is discouraged, and decides not to write a blog post. The only bad option here is 4. So exactly what is additional research going to achieve at this point? (There is of course a point to doing the research before inventing your own algorithm. Or you can do it because this kind of CS archaeology is fun. But it doesn't really have a lot of value).