3 ms·
> I have no doubt that academics have a ton of expertise, but their output in paper form is basically unusable, I'm not sure it achieves any purpose besides res
by tchalla 5y ago
> I have no doubt that academics have a ton of expertise, but their output in paper form is basically unusable, I'm not sure it achieves any purpose besides resume padding.
If you think the entire field of academia doesn't achieve any purpose, you may want to reconsider your position. Most likely, almost everything that you do today on a computer was an academic paper. Yes, it was without code and data. Yet, it was not unusable and achieved more than enough purpose.
The average comment on HN on academia comes from a mindset where everyone wants a product. The purpose of a paper is NOT to release a software or a product. But, to test an idea under some assumptions. That's what all research does at its core - formulate a hypothesis, design an experiment to test the hypothesis and report the results and implications. Are all research papers perfect"? No. Are all of them usable? No.
Your use case - sound synthesis for a specific instrument - may not be a scientific challenge. It is however an engineering challenge and hence, you found a better answer amongst hobbyists and tinkerers. Now, try looking for the a vaccine for Covid - and guess where you'd find that answer? In decades of research on mRNA with repeated failures, papers that couldn't be replicated, unavailability of "code" and samples with verbal descriptions skipping crucial details.
- tvhahn 5y agoBalaji Srinivasan had a good take on this recently in his conversation with Tim Ferris. I quote: "The thing is, I don’t care if something has a thousand retweets, what I care about is if it has two or three independent confirmations from economically dis-aligned actors. This is the same as academia, by the way, everybody’s optimizing citations. What you actually want to optimize is independent replication. That’s what true science is. It’s not peer review. It is physical tests."
- czzr 5y agoYes and no. Literal replications are less valuable than people think - what you really want are independent tests of different parts of the causal network of the underlying model.