If you can't be bothered to read new things unless they're "worth your time", the hell with you. Realistically, even in a narrow field just reading (forget abo

If you can't be bothered to read new things unless they're "worth your time", the hell with you. Realistically, even in a narrow field just reading (forget about working through the mathematics, checking the results, etc.) all the papers that are published through the slow existing process would take up more than 100% of working time. Clearly there has to be some kind of filtering process. As it happens, I think that this process should be both faster and more open, but it is foolish to dismiss realistic concerns about how to decide which research it is most worthwhile to read. There's a big difference between that and being afraid to be exposed to something outside their comfort zone (I am not too sure what you mean by that). You may hope to be so lucky as to have competitors with people like that on your team, but would you be happy to have on your team someone who spent literally their entire workday every day reading reviews of other people's work without contributing anything new of their own?