3 ms·
> because of obscure work he published in the 1990s Well, did you really read it? In what respect do you consider it to be "obscure"? Because they used other t
by Rochus 6y ago
> because of obscure work he published in the 1990s
Well, did you really read it? In what respect do you consider it to be "obscure"? Because they used other terms to name the concepts?
> As any entrepreneur knows, just having an idea isn't enough.
You mean he should have patented it? Is this really the way to go: scientists in machine learning have to patent their work to make sure it's properly attributed in future?
- smohare 6y agoI’m not familiar with the work in question, but this is a common theme in academic research. Sometimes there’s a kernel of an idea published by one individual which is later rediscovered independently (or not) and developed into a much more comprehensive theory. The latter is what the OP means by “just having an idea is not enough.”
- Rochus 6y ago> The latter is what the OP means by “just having an idea is not enough.” That's quite far fetched given the sentence starts with "As any entrepreneur knows". Society can consider itself fortunate that every valuable scientific finding eventually prevails; but unfortunately - as many cases show - it often takes several publications of the same idea, and the respective earlier authors often fall into oblivion (if known at all).