When does knowledge sharing lead to knowledge production?

A few highlights for me from the paper:

> synergistic collaborations where partners have both common knowledge and divergent expertise

> We show that brief, information-rich interactions between people with some overlapping knowledge interests can have a productive effect on knowledge transfer, creation and diffusion.

I wish there was more serendipity in working remote

Are we presuming that publishing a paper is a loose indicator of knowledge creation?

IMHO, knowledge is created via the intuition within a mind. Many times, that intuition is at work when the mind is not focused on the matter. Sleeping, commuting, bantering and other distracted processes can cause the realization of new knowledge. It can also manifest during a conversation where information is exchanged and new information is factored against what is already known.

There was a point in my career that I realized many conversations that I contributed to included contributions I had never consciously learned. Reflecting later, I'd find myself surprised and what I'd said, and mused at how I knew it.

Publishing studies is sharing. All students of a subject should learn study design in their first semester (I know I didn't and didn't have to back in the day). Every study should be peer-reviewed by students in their second semester and in their last. Master students should then be required to review multiple in their last semester. I know they are not skilled enough yet. The point is knowledge production in their brains and circles. All of it should be published. All of it should be translated in multiple variations by AI assisted humans from multiple countries. There should be a HN/ribbon farm types forum where these peer-reviews can then be discussed by the smart and curious mob (including PhDs). Studies should be randomly assigned. All resources necessary should be paid by a direct tax of billionaires. I will stop reading stuff on HN now.