4 ms·
That response seems a bit grumpy, given that it doesn't suggest anything concrete to be done. I'm in agreement that the ACM seems wholly focused on the academic
by adambatkin 12y ago
That response seems a bit grumpy, given that it doesn't suggest anything concrete to be done. I'm in agreement that the ACM seems wholly focused on the academic side of things (disclosure: I'm a member, but not in the academic world). CACM seems filled with articles covering subjects in such a cursory way that I could do the same just by reading the summary from a Google search. The rest of ACM's publications (and all their conferences) seem happy spending 3 pages defining concepts like "a positive integer" with complex symbols and terminology - sure, we can decode that with some time and perseverance (and it may be necessary for proper academic rigor) but it's a good way to keep the rest of the world out.
My take: ACM either needs to accept that it's currently geared for only the academic world, or become an organization that's drastically different than it is today.
- geomblog 12y ago"I'm in agreement that the ACM seems wholly focused on the academic side of things" the irony is that academics would disagree with this. I think ACM seems to have done an excellent job at pleasing exactly no one.
- adambatkin 12y agoReally? Is there even a single ACM conference where a non-academic would be welcome submitting a paper or talk (and yes, dedicated researchers at corporations count as academics, if one of the qualifications is a PhD)
- geomblog 12y agoIn the world of data analysis (take KDD as an example) there are explicit encouragements (via multiple tracks, workshops, and demos) for industry folk to present their work even if it's not considered academic research. But that isn't my point at all. Conferences as such are run by academics and probably have many biases. But the ACM as an organization doesn't do as much for academics as might be perceived from the outside.