Thread

1. phoghed · 1790944096 · focus · HN ↗

   A very high number of Redditors think they know more/better than a Harvard professor and dismiss him out of hand. May someone grant us all a measure of their confidence.

   1. glitchc · 1790945148 · focus · HN ↗

      Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. Each paper will need to be judged on its own merits, irrespective of the source.

      1. sdcfgy · 1790945588 · focus · HN ↗

         From my own experience, I'm not sure that is necessarily the case. Retraction Watch is also an interesting read.

         I suspect there will be citations galore shortly, faster than anyone can think.

      2. smallmancontrov · 1790948114 · focus · HN ↗

         Reputations are the answer to spam.

         Good judgement takes time, but if the time to judge exceeds the time to spam -- and it does, by many orders of magnitude -- then we should expect the approach "judge each work by its merits" to result in being overwhelmed by spam, which we already are. Reputations let you amortize the cost of acceptance and reduce the cost of rejection, giving you a fighting chance against spam that extreme open-mindedness does not.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.