Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

In order to check, if what you write makes sense, we have to read at least all texts you link to, probably also links in these text. This will take perhaps one day, if done accurately. Do you prefer that all readers spend the time, or wouldn't it be an advantage, if a few knowledgeable experts would do the job and signal to everybody: what he writes makes sense?

Sure, peer review is not flawless. But flawed procedures can either be replaced or improved. Improvement keeps what is good and changes the rest. Complete replacement may come with new problems.

Don't think that you can escape vanity where people are involved. Not even in science. There are also always people who make use of system errors. As long as that is only a few percent, we do pretty well.

And yes, I think snowwrestler also has a very good point.




> Do you prefer that all readers spend the time, or wouldn't it be an advantage, if a few knowledgeable experts would do the job and signal to everybody: what he writes makes sense?

Division of labor does not imply peer review. Peer review is merely an ad hoc, unproven, flawed way of implementing division of labor.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: