3 ms·
Isn't this a kinda narrow view of what's valuable? Sure, it's valuable for your reputation or your academic career only if it becomes widespread. But if someth
by ifyoubuildit 4y ago
Isn't this a kinda narrow view of what's valuable? Sure, it's valuable for your reputation or your academic career only if it becomes widespread.
But if something has predictive power, it's valuable no matter how many other people know it. In some cases, it's way more valuable when it is still unknown, because nobody has had the chance to capitalize on it yet.
- tptacek 4y agoI think you're talking about science in general, and Stefan is talking specifically about papers.
- ifyoubuildit 4y agoI'm not familiar with the person behind the tweet, so I don't know any more than what the quote says. But I'm saying that if an individual paper says a thing, and that thing ends up being useful, then how is that not valuable? It could end up being wrong, but so could anything else you pick up from anywhere. In some instances, it won't end up being useful because it's only relevant to someone in a lab full of million dollar equipment. But that'll only be the case sometimes.
- tptacek 4y agoSome papers are super important! Some papers aren't. (from the ice age... to the dole age...) "Being a paper" isn't a very meaningful metric. That's all that's being said.