Yeah, those greedy guys just want to (1) keep their (underpaid) jobs and (2) have a bit more money to increase pay for their (underpaid) students. :)
As with software engineers, and every other job, some academics are crappy and some are amazing. Let's not paint everybody with the same brush.
As for incremental, well, the AI you're all so fond of was incremental academic research for a couple decades before it was this sudden world changing thing.
I think they're criticizing the system, not the people who participate in the system.
While i don't disagree that there's a problem with publishing for the sake of publishing, we really do need the incremental papers. GPS (the evergreen science example) is the result of incremental papers starting in the 40s with grants for atomic clocks
That is not "revealed preference". That is literally what is demanded of them else they be fired.
Revealed preference of academia as a whole, not of the individuals working within it.
Still same bullshit claim. These are requirements for academia to get money or other resources. No grants and no papers, no resources. And yes, resources are necessary.