Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There are lots of well written detailed articles that don’t call themselves research.


There are also lots of horribly written, superficial articles that do call themselves research. Hence my overarching point: let's quit with the dog and pony show.

EDIT:

"Research is 'creative and systematic work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge'. It involves the collection, organization, and analysis of evidence to increase understanding of a topic, characterized by a particular attentiveness to controlling sources of bias and error."

The crucial/key words/phrases here are: "systematic", "increase understanding of a topic", "controlling sources of bias and error". Nowhere do I see "completely brand new never before heard of".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research

EDIT2:

> It’s a terminology issue for me.

PLDI, the premier compilers/PL conference, which you must put a lot of stock in since you care about the current institutionally supported notion of "research", disagrees with you.


I don’t put any stock in PLDI.

I’ve been published there, twice, but academic understanding of PL implementation is probably at least a decade (if not more) behind where the top folks in industry are. If you’re good at abstract interpretation, IR design, GC, etc then you’re going to be making good money and having a blast shipping that shit to people, usually in some open source context with a friendly and nontoxic community around you. So much better than the hatchet-job style reviewing and publish-or-perish of the PLDI crew.


> I’ve been published there, twice, but academic understanding of PL implementation is probably at least a decade (if not more) behind where the top folks in industry are.

My friend you're just driving more nails into your own coffin; yes I'm very well aware of this and hence all the more reason to dispense with the idea that what PLDI publishes needs to be cutting edge novelty.

> So much better than the hatchet-job style reviewing and publish-or-perish of the PLDI crew.

Again: you're literally contradicting yourself. The reason PLDI and all other "top" venues are so toxic is because of people like you on review committees that demand utmost novelty. Relax your requirements (i.e. encourage them to relax their requirements) and you will magically transform academic research into a fun, friendly, and vibrant community.


I’m not on the PLDI review committee. Haven’t ever been.


> i.e. encourage them to relax their requirements




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: