131–140 of 164 posts
I wonder if they could use some of it to make an experimental post-publication review system. I'm not sure what the future of peer review is, but I doubt it would hurt for them to try.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems a reasonable use of NSF money to me, to promote sciences by creating a common infrastructure for organizing the world's library of preprints. It's infrastructure of a sorts, and civil government is the ideal party to fund civil infrastructure. (Isn't it?) Not random FAANG's, and I don't see why they'd want to anyway—what they'd get out of it. FAANG's aren't charities; anything they do that looks philanthropic i…
I’m not saying it isn’t a bad use of NSF funds, I’m saying that especially in the AI space that industry use of arXiv is large enough that taxpayers deserve to have industry foot the bill.
And let's not lose perspective: the stuff posted on arxiv.org is collectively like a million times more valuable than the servers themselves.
I wonder if they could use some of it to make an experimental post-publication review system. I'm not sure what the future of peer review is, but I doubt it would hurt for them to try.
I think it's antithetical to the philosophy of arxiv in the first place. It's a preprint service. Adding a review process would make it... a journal. Arxiv being impartial to the content it publishes is one of its' greatest strengths.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being HN someone needed to make that comment. All tech companies can be reduced to “serving some bits and bytes”
The answer would still be interesting for those for whom it's not obvious. I include myself among those people.
* converting PDFs to HTML is an annoying problem
* searchability of the repo is likely an annoying problem
* any new features that stakeholders want added (commenting, annotations, etc) * ongoing hosting / CDN cost
I am really glad arXiv is getting more funding. It is an essential resource. For me personally, it’ll be really interesting to see if the frontend changes. No doubt there are some important improvements that can be made (a website can always be made more accessible, moderation tools, support for name changes as mentioned, etc.) However, to first approximation, arXiV’s website already seems almost like a platonic idea…
I’ve built a tool using Arxiv’s API to help explore computer science papers: https://trendingpapers.com/ I hope they keep their great work especially in the API front..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The answer would still be interesting for those for whom it's not obvious. I include myself among those people.
* overhead - people cost a lot of money: this includes ongoing maintenance of the tech stack, including rewrites of obsolete parts, but also ops cost - preprinting can include more than one human touchpoint * converting PDFs to HTML is an annoying problem * searchability of the repo is likely an annoying problem * any new features that stakeholders want added (commenting, annotations, etc) * ongoing hosting / CDN cos…
I'm just a bit confused because this is a site that already works really well and isn't technically difficult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve built a tool using Arxiv’s API to help explore computer science papers: https://trendingpapers.com/ I hope they keep their great work especially in the API front..
Cool idea! Is there a way to go to the arxiv page ( https://arxiv.org/abs/ ...) of a paper instead of only going to the PDF ( https://arxiv.org/pdf/ ...) without manually manipulating the URL?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve built a tool using Arxiv’s API to help explore computer science papers: https://trendingpapers.com/ I hope they keep their great work especially in the API front..
This would be great if it were expanded to other subjects as well! Very cool! I’d post it as a Show HN
I will implement the expansion to other areas and post it again once done, as this will be a major change in the codebase
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CS was surely earlier, it was quite widely used by 2006 in my recollection
Like I said, it's very rough since the transition happened over several year. I dunno, you can eyeball this plot; if anything I'd say it didn't become default in CS until after 2010: https://info.arxiv.org/help/stats/2021_by_area/index.html
Do you happen to know what "eess" is?