
Ask HN: What would you change about how scientific research works? - tosh
inspired by https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;eriktorenberg&#x2F;status&#x2F;1170143617555390465?s=21
======
billconan
less pretentiousness, more sincerity. papers have become the tool for claiming
victory and fundings. The authors don't sincerely want you to understand them.
They don't want you to understand how moon landing works, they only want you
to see they lifted the flag on the moon.

I think papers should have more intuitions and visuals. Both data and programs
should be included, in addition to static contents.

I once read a great article on paper being obsolete. I can't agree more.

"It was a shame that in mathematics it’s been a tradition for hundreds of
years to make papers as formal and austere as possible, often suppressing the
very visual aids that mathematicians use to make their discoveries."

[https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-
scie...](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-scientific-
paper-is-obsolete/556676/)

The author showed the importance of research being interactive and
reproducible.

I think a very good example of interactive journal is
[https://distill.pub/](https://distill.pub/)

That article helped spark my project too.

[https://epiphany.pub/post?refId=2684bc94f9fcb9ffe637ebfbeba2...](https://epiphany.pub/post?refId=2684bc94f9fcb9ffe637ebfbeba2af8c797c6ad9a66181026ee4bd3806b6f211)

------
probinso
I would not allow a single unpaid intern. I would not allow any unpaid work on
the property for which research is done. people deserve to be respected for
their time, and research brings in enough money to warrant it.

------
ArtWomb
The number one request: long term grants. Think 30-year guaranteed fellowships
de-coupled from "output". Danger is in creating "monocultures" around one
topic that sucks the oxygen from any nascent innovation.

There is a profound undercurrent seeking to alter the entire research model.
The lion's share of funding has moved to proprietary research labs. And the
model itself creates perverse incentives. It's the "Do we really need 200
fresh econ PhD's per year" scenario.

