Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
openaccess.engineering.oregonstate.edu
Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
1–10 of 19 posts
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#2Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#3Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#4Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.
There is at least one Google researcher on that list (and various academic professors on that list are employed by Google as consultants).
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#5I think (correct me if I am wrong) machine learning (and a lot of other fields within CS) is the first field that has completely shattered the closed journal type system in Academia. I work in an interdisciplinary field with an ML focus, and many non-ML faculty and collaborators are just so surprised hearing how the machine learning community generally approaches publications.
There is no need whatsoever for the ML field to go back. I also feel the cat is out of the bag for ML, and there is no turning back into a system that Nature promotes even if they are trying to.
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#6Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.
I signed it.
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#7Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.
Ian Goodfellow just signed it and there are 4 others.
(I hope Dietterich verifies the authenticity of these singatures. Someone could just add these as a prank.)
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#8Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.
It will be interesting to see if Geoffrey Hinton signs.
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#9Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.
Jeff Dean signed it, so...
Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence
#10Some big names signed there. Sounds like a death sentence for this journal, despite the prestigious pedigree. Either it will wither or become a second-rate trashcan.
I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.