4 ms·

How do you think science work? It's like losing weight and gaining muscle, you have to work hard at it and there is no moment in time where you can say that tha

How do you think science work? It's like losing weight and gaining muscle, you have to work hard at it and there is no moment in time where you can say that that's the moment you lost weight or gained muscle. It is all incremental progress.

juskrey 7y ago
Or it's like a huge citation rings and mutual salary justifications?
- nkrisc 7y ago
  Sounds like you've already made up your mind about it and aren't looking for an answer to your question.
- rumanator 7y ago
  > Or it's like a huge citation rings and mutual salary justifications? If you have absolutely nothing to add to the discussion, please consider not saying anything at all. You're just adding noise to an otherwise interesting discussion. At least NVidia is doing something. You? You're just wasting everyone's time with your trolling.
  - ramraj07 7y ago
    I left academia after wasting all my twenties believing there's more to it than citation rings. And maybe there is a small amount more. But my conclusion is that in general citation rings (I typically use a more colloquial Reddit phrase involving geometric shapes and descriptions of motion) and ego stroking is the main purpose of academia. Any scientific progress is incidental or often merely accidental inspite of people trying not to move the needle for personal gain. "At least Nvidia is doing something" - like what exactly? Sounds more like a PR move than anything. They can have a more tangible effect donating money for actual efforts to help people probably. Whenever I said "something is better than nothing" my dad would immediately reply, "but nothing is better than nonsense." He was a smart man indeed.
    - kinleyd 7y ago
      Thanks for your honesty. I'm not from academia but I have made similar conclusions in my own area. I'm trying to find what I can pass on to my children to save them some time, but it's awfully hard.
    - rumanator 7y ago
      > I left academia after wasting all my twenties believing there's more to it than citation rings. And maybe there is a small amount more. I also worked quite a few years in academia, including participating in a few international research programs, and although the indentured servitude facet is indeed the problem and the "publish or perish" pressure puts an emphasis on an aspect that is not very relevant, I have to say you're completely overblowing and misrepresenting stuff that has no meaning or consequence. If you ever had a career in academia you'd be clearly aware that the only thing that counts is whether your paper gets approved. Citation volumes are entirely meaningless beyond the vanity aspect of it all, as it only has an impact in main path analysis, and only if you use an algorithm that weighs edges wrt connectivity, which is a bit meaningless. Thus you're complaining about something that at most has an impact on your search results, and only if you are a competent researcher who doesn't exercise any independent reasoning, which is absurd. Thus, what leads you to believe that your concerns are meaningful or relevant to the discussion? It feels like you tried desperately to pull an appeal to authority that has no substance or merit, quite frankly, and in a way that puts your credibility into question.
      - ramraj07 7y ago
        You've probably not heard of the RCR, or the relative citation ratio, that the NIH has instituted in recent years then? Anyways, by citation rings I mean more than about the h-index or just the citation counts. It also includes cliquey things such as who cites who, who's a friendly reviewer and who's not, how do you continue to keep publishing in a way that makes you look like the expert more than finding out the truth, etc. But seems like you're an expert who knows better so I'll leave this conversation here.
        rumanator 7y ago
  - matz1 7y ago
    The poster make a good point, bunch of papers is not actual progress, huge citation rings and mutual salary justifications is a big issue with these papers. An actual progress probably would be something like : effective cure for a disease found.
    - Goladus 7y ago
      bunch of papers is not actual progress That all depends on the content of the papers. Protein folding is immensely complex. An actual progress probably would be something like : effective cure for a disease found. This is such a silly way to frame things. Often the reason you don't know a cure for a disease is because you aren't even really sure what causes the, or even if the disease has just one cause. You might imagine we're waiting for a "Cure for Autism" but what if we eventually discover that there are 20 different conditions that might manifest as autism and each one needs a separate treatment? Do you have the patience for that or will you just throw your hands in the air and complain about no progress? There has been lots of progress in therapies and treatments for diseases, much of it hampered by the fact that protein interaction and biological pathways are so complex and there's so much we don't understand. So before we can "find a cure" we need to understand how the systems work. For example, in 2009 a drug called Cetuximab was approved to treat colorectal cancer, but ONLY in patients without a specific genetic mutation (KRAS) that renders the drug ineffective. That knowledge comes from understanding cancer genomics which requires a lot of statistics and computational analysis. I'm not saying FAH is a dramatic world-changing part of this progress but it's clear that there is a LOT we don't know and finding cures for many diseases is going to take a lot of incremental progress that doesn't yield anything obvious immediately.
      - matz1 7y ago
        Sure, you may call it anything else but don't call it actual progress.
        Goladus 7y ago
        It's progress by any reasonable use of language. Your definition of progress is worthless.
  - nitrogen 7y ago
    "Doing something" can be worse than doing nothing. OP may be posting with an agenda, but onlookers on the fence about running up their electric bill will actually want to know that it's for some real benefit and not a counterproductive show of solidarity (displays of solidarity do have their place, don't get me wrong).
burntoutfire 7y ago
Still, would be nice to be able to point to some tangible result, such as "knowledge obtained eventually led to developing of better treatment for bone cancer" etc.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  Doesn't even have to be that. It would even be interesting to know what has been figured out based on the folding even if it hasn't led to any improvements in medical treatments.

juskrey 7y ago

Or it's like a huge citation rings and mutual salary justifications?

nkrisc 7y ago
Sounds like you've already made up your mind about it and aren't looking for an answer to your question.
rumanator 7y ago
> Or it's like a huge citation rings and mutual salary justifications? If you have absolutely nothing to add to the discussion, please consider not saying anything at all. You're just adding noise to an otherwise interesting discussion. At least NVidia is doing something. You? You're just wasting everyone's time with your trolling.
- ramraj07 7y ago
  I left academia after wasting all my twenties believing there's more to it than citation rings. And maybe there is a small amount more. But my conclusion is that in general citation rings (I typically use a more colloquial Reddit phrase involving geometric shapes and descriptions of motion) and ego stroking is the main purpose of academia. Any scientific progress is incidental or often merely accidental inspite of people trying not to move the needle for personal gain. "At least Nvidia is doing something" - like what exactly? Sounds more like a PR move than anything. They can have a more tangible effect donating money for actual efforts to help people probably. Whenever I said "something is better than nothing" my dad would immediately reply, "but nothing is better than nonsense." He was a smart man indeed.
  - kinleyd 7y ago
    Thanks for your honesty. I'm not from academia but I have made similar conclusions in my own area. I'm trying to find what I can pass on to my children to save them some time, but it's awfully hard.
  - rumanator 7y ago
    > I left academia after wasting all my twenties believing there's more to it than citation rings. And maybe there is a small amount more. I also worked quite a few years in academia, including participating in a few international research programs, and although the indentured servitude facet is indeed the problem and the "publish or perish" pressure puts an emphasis on an aspect that is not very relevant, I have to say you're completely overblowing and misrepresenting stuff that has no meaning or consequence. If you ever had a career in academia you'd be clearly aware that the only thing that counts is whether your paper gets approved. Citation volumes are entirely meaningless beyond the vanity aspect of it all, as it only has an impact in main path analysis, and only if you use an algorithm that weighs edges wrt connectivity, which is a bit meaningless. Thus you're complaining about something that at most has an impact on your search results, and only if you are a competent researcher who doesn't exercise any independent reasoning, which is absurd. Thus, what leads you to believe that your concerns are meaningful or relevant to the discussion? It feels like you tried desperately to pull an appeal to authority that has no substance or merit, quite frankly, and in a way that puts your credibility into question.
    - ramraj07 7y ago
      You've probably not heard of the RCR, or the relative citation ratio, that the NIH has instituted in recent years then? Anyways, by citation rings I mean more than about the h-index or just the citation counts. It also includes cliquey things such as who cites who, who's a friendly reviewer and who's not, how do you continue to keep publishing in a way that makes you look like the expert more than finding out the truth, etc. But seems like you're an expert who knows better so I'll leave this conversation here.
      - rumanator 7y ago
- matz1 7y ago
  The poster make a good point, bunch of papers is not actual progress, huge citation rings and mutual salary justifications is a big issue with these papers. An actual progress probably would be something like : effective cure for a disease found.
  - Goladus 7y ago
    bunch of papers is not actual progress That all depends on the content of the papers. Protein folding is immensely complex. An actual progress probably would be something like : effective cure for a disease found. This is such a silly way to frame things. Often the reason you don't know a cure for a disease is because you aren't even really sure what causes the, or even if the disease has just one cause. You might imagine we're waiting for a "Cure for Autism" but what if we eventually discover that there are 20 different conditions that might manifest as autism and each one needs a separate treatment? Do you have the patience for that or will you just throw your hands in the air and complain about no progress? There has been lots of progress in therapies and treatments for diseases, much of it hampered by the fact that protein interaction and biological pathways are so complex and there's so much we don't understand. So before we can "find a cure" we need to understand how the systems work. For example, in 2009 a drug called Cetuximab was approved to treat colorectal cancer, but ONLY in patients without a specific genetic mutation (KRAS) that renders the drug ineffective. That knowledge comes from understanding cancer genomics which requires a lot of statistics and computational analysis. I'm not saying FAH is a dramatic world-changing part of this progress but it's clear that there is a LOT we don't know and finding cures for many diseases is going to take a lot of incremental progress that doesn't yield anything obvious immediately.
    - matz1 7y ago
      Sure, you may call it anything else but don't call it actual progress.
      - Goladus 7y ago
        It's progress by any reasonable use of language. Your definition of progress is worthless.
- nitrogen 7y ago
  "Doing something" can be worse than doing nothing. OP may be posting with an agenda, but onlookers on the fence about running up their electric bill will actually want to know that it's for some real benefit and not a counterproductive show of solidarity (displays of solidarity do have their place, don't get me wrong).

burntoutfire 7y ago

Still, would be nice to be able to point to some tangible result, such as "knowledge obtained eventually led to developing of better treatment for bone cancer" etc.

Mirioron 7y ago
Doesn't even have to be that. It would even be interesting to know what has been figured out based on the folding even if it hasn't led to any improvements in medical treatments.