5 ms·

I think the point is to publish before anyone else does. If they wait until they're full paper is ready, they might be scooped.

by mabbo 4y ago

Yajirobe 4y ago
Are we calling dibs on research now? Is this a kindergarten?
- girvo 4y ago
  Science/academia has been for as long as I can remember.
- sidlls 4y ago
  Read some of the history around natural philosophy some few hundred years ago. It’s a real hoot, how petty and ego-driven some of these people were. Leibniz’s attempts at taking credit for Newton’s hard work come to mind. (Tongue somewhat planted in cheek here.) Research has always been about getting credit for first discovering something, to some extent.
- mattkrause 4y ago
  Now?! Sorry, but someone called dibs on the idea of “priority” long, long ago. The oldest dispute on this list is in the 1500s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_priority_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_priority_di...
ReaLNero 4y ago
I'm not sure how to feel about this. If the purpose of science research is to build the understanding we have, teaser articles seem more like a way to put a name on a creation without actually contributing to our understanding of something. I guess this is an artifact of how cutthroat academia is and how vital it is to have credit for being first.
- eynsham 4y ago
  So long as it doesn't slow or otherwise impede the dissemination of the full paper I don't mind personally.
- sweettea 4y ago
  But it is a long principle of academia to avoid being scooped by putting out priority-proving work. Consider US patents; or, further back, I read here yesterday that Galileo published anagrams of his results and Kepler took great delight in reverse-engineering them, accidentally finding other true facts other than Galileo's intended discovery.
- zitterbewegung 4y ago
  If they were able to complete it in a week then it is a big deal… especially about wording if that they would be scooped.
  - mattkrause 4y ago
    Three days! The Deep Mind paper came out on the 5th of October; the first version of this on the 8th.
- TheRealPomax 4y ago
  > If the purpose of science research is to build the understanding we have. It's not. It never was. It's always been "to build the understanding that I or this small group I am part of has, that gives us an edge for a while until we share it with the world because it looks like someone else might otherwise pretend to have discovered it". The idea of a noble science, diligently working towards the betterment of mankind, has always been a romantic fantasy at best.
  - golem14 4y ago
    "The Double Helix" by James Watson is still a surprisingly accessible read that's very relevant here.
- Beldin 4y ago
PaulHoule 4y ago
But now that people know the solution exists, other people can find a justification for it.

I think the point is to publish before anyone else does. If they wait until they're full paper is ready, they might be scooped.

by mabbo 4y ago

I think the point is to publish before anyone else does. If they wait until they're full paper is ready, they might be scooped.

Yajirobe 4y ago

Are we calling dibs on research now? Is this a kindergarten?

girvo 4y ago
Science/academia has been for as long as I can remember.
sidlls 4y ago
Read some of the history around natural philosophy some few hundred years ago. It’s a real hoot, how petty and ego-driven some of these people were. Leibniz’s attempts at taking credit for Newton’s hard work come to mind. (Tongue somewhat planted in cheek here.) Research has always been about getting credit for first discovering something, to some extent.
mattkrause 4y ago
Now?! Sorry, but someone called dibs on the idea of “priority” long, long ago. The oldest dispute on this list is in the 1500s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_priority_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_priority_di...

ReaLNero 4y ago

I'm not sure how to feel about this. If the purpose of science research is to build the understanding we have, teaser articles seem more like a way to put a name on a creation without actually contributing to our understanding of something. I guess this is an artifact of how cutthroat academia is and how vital it is to have credit for being first.

eynsham 4y ago
So long as it doesn't slow or otherwise impede the dissemination of the full paper I don't mind personally.
sweettea 4y ago
But it is a long principle of academia to avoid being scooped by putting out priority-proving work. Consider US patents; or, further back, I read here yesterday that Galileo published anagrams of his results and Kepler took great delight in reverse-engineering them, accidentally finding other true facts other than Galileo's intended discovery.
zitterbewegung 4y ago
If they were able to complete it in a week then it is a big deal… especially about wording if that they would be scooped.
- mattkrause 4y ago
  Three days! The Deep Mind paper came out on the 5th of October; the first version of this on the 8th.
TheRealPomax 4y ago
> If the purpose of science research is to build the understanding we have. It's not. It never was. It's always been "to build the understanding that I or this small group I am part of has, that gives us an edge for a while until we share it with the world because it looks like someone else might otherwise pretend to have discovered it". The idea of a noble science, diligently working towards the betterment of mankind, has always been a romantic fantasy at best.
- golem14 4y ago
  "The Double Helix" by James Watson is still a surprisingly accessible read that's very relevant here.
Beldin 4y ago

PaulHoule 4y ago

But now that people know the solution exists, other people can find a justification for it.