4 ms·
Sure and that's why we have science magazines like New Scientist, National Geographic, Nature etc. They read papers most of us won't understand and translate th
by sktrdie 9y ago
Sure and that's why we have science magazines like New Scientist, National Geographic, Nature etc. They read papers most of us won't understand and translate them into a form that is more approachable.
I would't want the actual scientist to also have to worry about the "design representation" of their research. If their work is important enough, others will do it for them.
- te7eyw8u 9y agoNew Scientist is awful
- kwhitefoot 9y agoSo people have been saying for the last 30 years. Yet no one seems to care enough to publish something better. Or even to suggest an alternative.
- AriaMinaei 9y ago> I would't want the actual scientist to also have to worry about the "design representation" of their research. If their work is important enough, others will do it for them. In reality though, that barely ever happens.
- Too 9y agoMore like they read papers most of us won't understand and deliberately misinterpret it to create catchy headlines.