2 ms·
About the "low hanging fruits". I don't really agree they were such a thing. It's just retrospectively that we name them as such. Or you have a specific exampl
by ocimbote 4y ago
About the "low hanging fruits". I don't really agree they were such a thing. It's just retrospectively that we name them as such.
Or you have a specific example in mind that I could use?
- matthewdgreen 4y agoI think the term is probably triggering you because it makes the work sound unimportant. I would say it’s the opposite. What’s harder now is to find discoveries that have the following characteristics: (1) they’re fundamental and very important to many areas, (2) an independent researcher working alone is able to discover them, and (3) they don’t require a singular 1-in-a-trillion human mind to discover. Usually the evidence we cite for (3) in the past is that multiple independent researchers did indeed make major discoveries (or at least overlapped in their findings.) The Calculus is an example. But there are other examples as well. Even Einstein’s brilliant theories have some priority disputes, and might have been discovered by another researcher if he hadn’t (but we can’t say for certain.)