Hacker News Reader

Also, when you're examining something that dubs itself "science," pointing out a spot of routine dishonesty, however small and irrelevant, is hardly indicating a "strawman." Shades of the [Curate's egg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curate's_egg). I'm sure most of the entries on Enron's balance sheet were perfectly accurate, as well.

View on HN

Yes, but how does one area of research of CS being pointless spoil the other areas? I don't think it is a curate's egg at all. I don't want to claim that CS is not spoiled, though. The patronage thing might be a problem. However, research topics do have to compete even in science - they may not be exposed to judgement by the general public, as are companies, but internally, there are mechanisms of selection. Probably not the best ones, but still. And if too much money would flow into obviously useless research, there might even be a public outcry.

It spoils the others because the relationship between science and personal honesty is extremely close and important. Science has to be utterly intolerant of nonsense. Its spirit is to attack it and take no prisoners. If you have this spirit - like D.J. Bernstein - you will not be welcome in any CS faculty that exhibits curate's egg nature, for fairly obvious reasons.

(I'm a particularly big fan of DJB because his very existence is a sort of counterattack - he's a programmer who's infiltrated the math department! Unfortunately there is only one of him, but we could certainly use a dozen more.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com