3 ms·
Why the gatekeeping. Only what is said matters, not who says it.
by billfruit 1y ago
Why the gatekeeping. Only what is said matters, not who says it.
- BlarfMcFlarf 1y agoPeer review specifically checks that what is being said passes scrutiny by experts in the field, so it is very much about what is being said.
- SJC_Hacker 1y agoThey why isn't it double blind ?
- BDPW 1y agoOften reviewing is executed double blind for exactly this reason. This can be difficult in small fields where you can more-or-less guess who's working on what, but the intent is definitely there.
- mcswell 1y agoI've reviewed computational linguistics papers in the past (I'm retired now, and the field is changing out from under me, so I don't do it any more). But all the reviews I did were double blind.
- tsimionescu 1y agoThat's a cute fantasy, but it doesn't work beyond a tiny scale. Credentials are critical to help filter data - 8 billion people all publishing random info can't be listened to.
- SoftTalker 1y ago> 8 billion people all publishing random info can't be listened to. Yet it's what we train LLMs on.
- tsimionescu 1y agoIt's what we train LLMs on to make them learn language, a thing that all healthy adult human beings are experts on using. It's definitely not what we train LLMs on if we want them to do science.
- birn559 1y agoWhich are known to be unreliable beyond basic things that most people that have some relevant experience get right anyway.
- verbify 1y agoThere's a paper Textbooks are all you need - https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.11644 https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.11644 > We introduce phi-1, a new large language model for code, with significantly smaller size than competing models: phi-1 is a Transformer-based model with 1.3B parameters, trained for 4 days on 8 A100s, using a selection of ``textbook quality" data from the web (6B tokens) and synthetically generated textbooks and exercises with GPT-3.5 (1B tokens). Despite this small scale, phi-1 attains pass@1 accuracy 50.6% on HumanEval and 55.5% on MBPP. It also displays surprising emergent properties compared to phi-1-base, our model before our finetuning stage on a dataset of coding exercises, and phi-1-small, a smaller model with 350M parameters trained with the same pipeline as phi-1 that still achieves 45% on HumanEval We train on the internet because, for example, I speak a fairly niche English dialect influenced by Hebrew, Yiddish and Aramaic, and there are no digitised textbooks or dictionaries that cover this language. I assume the base weights of models are still using high quality materials.
- billfruit 1y agoGitHub lets anyone upload code. It works perfectly fine.
- tsimionescu 1y agoThere's no problem in letting anyone upload. The problem is in claiming that we should give the same amount of attention to the work of anyone, that "only what is said matters". Just like we don't run random code off github, we have no reason to read random papers on arxiv. And, even on github, anyone using a project knows that "who is maintaining this project" is a major decision factor.
- billfruit 1y agoMy objection was to the concept of gatekeeping/barriers to entry for posting/uploading. Not that everything uploaded demands the same attention.
- tsimionescu 1y agoSure and you're right about that. But the thread was about not judging a paper on the basis of authorship - my quote was a direct quote from the post I replied to.
- NeutralCrane 1y agoWith all the issues surrounding modern science and the replication crisis, much of which stems from the current standard of journal publications, I would argue that your alternative doesn’t scale any better.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- birn559 1y agoIf what is said has any merit can be very hard to judge beyond things that are well known. In addition, peer reviews are anonymous for both sides (as far as possible).
- watwut 1y agoYeah, that is why 4chan became famous for being the source of trustworthy and valuable scientific research. /s
- billfruit 1y agoGitHub works on a similar model, without any barrier of entry, and it works well.
- randomNumber7 1y agoScience is in a strange state, but I don't think the current HN audience (of inexperienced ai script kids) is the crowd to have a valuable discussion about it.
- jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago[flagged]