4 ms·

>Science being funded across borders isn’t a bad thing Collaboration is the key word here. This isn't science being funded across borders, this is research be

>Science being funded across borders isn’t a bad thing Collaboration is the key word here. This isn't science being funded across borders, this is research being stolen, such that the work is quickly finished off in China and published before the researchers in the US do, the thief and China getting all the credit to themselves and a bunch of knowledge at no cost. The difference with the EU is that it is mutual, consensual collaboration with both sides putting in work and funding.

capableweb 7y ago
> this is research being stolen Well, I guess copied would be a better word, as the people who "had the research" still has it. > quickly finished off in China and published before the researchers in the US do Sounds like they are doing a better job than US researchers then? Unless of course, they do a sloppy job finishing it, but then US researchers can just take their time, do it properly and people would use their research instead. Free market of research basically, just have to make sure your research is actually better.
- freeone3000 7y ago
  That's not how research works. The first paper published is the important one; all others are derivative, and must prove novelty or improvement anew. And even if you do, you must cite the first paper published, and that's the one with the prestige associated with the citation count, not yours, which might even be overlooked. Simply being "more robust" is unlikely to be sufficiently novel for acceptance into a journal or conference.
- oh_sigh 7y ago
  This "free market" is similar to JK Rowling asking me to proofread her new Harry Potter book that is 95% finished. I take it and "finish" the last 5% and then publish it as my own book. I honestly cannot understand this viewpoint that stealing private information is not only cool, but a good thing to do. I literally hear it only on hackernews and no where else in my life.
  - ourlordcaffeine 7y ago
    Userbase here is generally young and idealistic, most probably don't know how research works and apparently can't tell the difference between mutual co-operation and state-sanctioned plagiarism.

capableweb 7y ago

> this is research being stolen Well, I guess copied would be a better word, as the people who "had the research" still has it. > quickly finished off in China and published before the researchers in the US do Sounds like they are doing a better job than US researchers then? Unless of course, they do a sloppy job finishing it, but then US researchers can just take their time, do it properly and people would use their research instead. Free market of research basically, just have to make sure your research is actually better.

freeone3000 7y ago
That's not how research works. The first paper published is the important one; all others are derivative, and must prove novelty or improvement anew. And even if you do, you must cite the first paper published, and that's the one with the prestige associated with the citation count, not yours, which might even be overlooked. Simply being "more robust" is unlikely to be sufficiently novel for acceptance into a journal or conference.
oh_sigh 7y ago
This "free market" is similar to JK Rowling asking me to proofread her new Harry Potter book that is 95% finished. I take it and "finish" the last 5% and then publish it as my own book. I honestly cannot understand this viewpoint that stealing private information is not only cool, but a good thing to do. I literally hear it only on hackernews and no where else in my life.
- ourlordcaffeine 7y ago
  Userbase here is generally young and idealistic, most probably don't know how research works and apparently can't tell the difference between mutual co-operation and state-sanctioned plagiarism.