Thread

1. move6729 · 1790888985 · focus · HN ↗

   This will just force high SNR Posters to other platforms. ArXiv is rate limiting itself out of relevance.

   1. AlotOfReading · 1790889451 · focus · HN ↗

      It doesn't seem humanly possible to produce >2 "high SNR" papers per month. If you have a larger batch of related papers, it's easy to spread submissions over multiple months. You should probably be doing that anyway, because comments on one paper may affect the others.

      1. Gregaros · 1790893248 · focus · HN ↗

         Insane. No. Mathematicians will not produce >2 "high SNR" papers per month as their rate calculated over any reasonable time scale; but their maximum per month? Very much the case that they will complete linked papers/dependencies/series of work/etc, spend a month in editing across multiple nearly-complete submissions, and so on.

         And in mathematics, at least, priority on results is determined by the first time it appears out in the wild; for most, this is the arXiv.

         Nobody is going to accept waiting a month on something that they fear may be scooped, costing them years of work and thought.

         This affectively makes the arXiv obsolete for much of the purpose it has heretofore been put to.

         1. AlotOfReading · 1790895408 · focus · HN ↗

            Arxiv has had a limit of 3 simultaneous submissions for a couple years now. This is only adding per-month limits.
         2. miki123211 · 1790902441 · focus · HN ↗

            I find it interesting that we, in the AI community, usually say "Arxiv", where mathematicians seem to say "the Arxiv".

            Whereas I would say "Have they put this on Arxiv yet?", mathematicians would say "Have they put this on the Arxiv yet?".

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.