Politics and science; is science being corrupted? (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Friday, March 05, 2010, 01:12 (5377 days ago) @ David Turell


> > http://www.physorg.com/news185780169.html
> > 
> > You'll find the last paragraph especially enlightening as this would completely democratize the process of peer review. 
> 
> It always amazes me when I read a 'new' medical finding that we 'knew' in the 1960's in cardiology. And your article above concerns an idea from 1941!!-Well, I can't speak for cardiology, but suffice it to say that I doubt Brin and Page would ever have thought to find their search algorithm in an old economics paper from 1941, heh. -Just read the editor's letter in my ACM journal, and heh, apparently there's a bit of a fuss in Computer Science regarding Peer Review. Publishing in CS is conference-driven as opposed to journal-driven. This means that the pressure isn't to say, make it into a journal like Nature, but to make it to the biggest name conferences. Personally, I prefer the conference approach--your publishing is your presentation, and people can tear into it right away. But those in my profession want it otherwise. Sigh. (Publication in computer science takes 4-5x as long as any other discipline.)

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"