Hacker News Reader

Comment by j45 | Hacker News Reader

Sincerely, perhaps you should publish on arxiv before a researcher reads it to run it and write a study.

It's fairly common we notice these types of threads where one thing is being postulated and then there's comments upon comments of doer's showing what they have done.

View on HN

somehow sad that some random dude on hn seems to have more brain than most scientists publishing on something about agents or prompting.

The AI world moves at a blistering pace. Academic publishing does not. In this particular case the "random dude on HN" is probably six to nine months ahead of the academic publication, not in the sense of being that much smarter but literally just being that much further progressed through time relative to the academic publication pipeline.

Accuracy is relevant though, and testing your assumptions before heading out, or keeping track of the particular changes (if any) aroudn what you're publishing is another thing.

Still, you have a more valid point :). Publishing is about publishing, not necessarily progress.

I just want folks on HN to remember they might be the cutting edge, or the tip of the arrow more times than they realize.

we should give a little more credit to the readership of HN. I'm not sure it's that much lower than the average academic publishing on arxiv.

Scientists are just random dudes (though some of them have been given a fancy hat by a university, which is a recognised mark of accomplishment).

Oh, HN is not random folks at all.

I wish the quiet folks who speak up from time to time would do it more often - I get to learn so much.

Not knowing is a gift in a way, we get to ask, learn.

Pretending is the disease.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com