undefined | Better HN

0 pointsindymike2y ago0 comments

> 99% of all papers mean nothing. They add nothing to the collective knowledge of humanity.

A lot of papers are done as a part of the process of getting a degree or keeping or getting job. The value is mostly the candidate showing they have the acumen to produce a paper of such quality that meets the publisher and peer review requirements. In some cases, it is to show a future employer some level of accomplishment or renown. The knowledge for humanity is mostly the authors ability to get published.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

RugnirViking2y ago· 1 in thread

well yes. But these should go somewhere else than the papers that may actually contain significant results. The problem we have here is that there is an enormous quantity of such useless papers mixed in with the ones actually trying to do science.

I understand that part of the reason for that is that people need to appear as though they are part of the "actually trying" crowd to get the desired job effects. But it is nonetheless a problem, and a large one very worth at least trying to solve.

indymikeOP2y ago

> I understand that part of the reason for that is that people need to appear as though they are part of the "actually trying" crowd to get the desired job effects

There's another less obvious problem: we don't always know what is groundbreaking and what is not until something is published and is accepted at large as being a really big deal.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse