> In my opinion the whole story about only accepting "novel" and "readily applicable" results in academia isn't quite helpful. A "Publish early, publish often"

> In my opinion the whole story about only accepting "novel" and "readily applicable" results in academia isn't quite helpful. A "Publish early, publish often" strategy could produce more and better results in the long term I think. I fail to see how publishing repeats of the same old conclusions that boil down to applying the same basic and well-known techniques to specific subsets of a trendy programming language, and in the process failing to provide anything meaningful, does anything to advance science. In fact, what does the article add to the understanding of the problem?