Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ArXiv's Next Chapter

blog.arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 107 posts

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#21

Post by TomasBM »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #14
TomasBM wrote: post #9

ArXiv is a good complement to the modern peer review, IMO. As long as someone "vouches" for you, and you adhere to its minimal standards, you're able to post a paper. Other readers can decide whether the paper is worth their attention, and whether the presented ideas or results are valuable. It's also good that it doesn't gatekeep with the paywalls that you can pretty much only afford by affiliating yourself with a t…

>3. It puts the effort on the readers to decide whether each paper is valuable, and particularly scientifically valuable, for which most readers will be unequipped. You say it as if replication crisis doesn't exist and publish or perish is not a thing.

Actually, the replication crisis shows how difficult (or underinvested) the process of reviewing is.

Removing this (often very basic) peer review doesn't somehow fix the problem. The solution lies in more thorough reviews and replication studies, not in everyone deciding for themselves.

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#22

Post by honzaik »

emil-lp wrote: post #20
honzaik wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cryptography, for example, which is essentially math + cs together

Which journal?

look at essentially any proceedings of any conference (in crypto we dont really do journals). see EUROCRYPT for example https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-91098-2 in there, every paper will be cut down and referring to full version for proofs etc. which are typically on eprint.iacr.org

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#23

Post by hodgehog11 »

rw2 wrote: post #3

Should charge AI for training on top of it or get them to donate. A small amount can fund them easily.

Papers submitted to arXiv under its most permissive license should always be free, as in beer, speech, freedom. For researchers that contribute to it, that is the intention for a reason. It is to serve public and corporate good without restriction.

This isn't me siding with AI companies by the way; it's a slippery slope argument.

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#24

Post by m-hodges »

I always struggle to figure out what role arXiv should play in my information diet. On the one hand I support Open Access research. On the other hand, peer review is vital, and a substantial quantity of “papers” on arXiv are just blog posts in a LaTeX trench coat.

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#25

Post by [deleted] »

honzaik wrote: post #19
emil-lp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know which field you're talking about, but in general, math and cs journals do not have page limits. By the way, one of my favorite pastimes is to download the latex source for papers on arxiv and read all the commented-out stuff. % we should make sure this theorem is actually true

cryptography, for example, which is essentially math + cs together

[deleted]

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#26

Post by seasox »

emil-lp wrote: post #20
honzaik wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cryptography, for example, which is essentially math + cs together

Which journal?

We usually do conferences in cryptography/security, and most of them have page limits: CCS, USENIX, NDSS, S&P, CRYPTO, EUROCRYPT all have page limits (some allow appendices, which reviewers are not obligated to read).

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#27

Post by montebicyclelo »

m-hodges wrote: post #24

I always struggle to figure out what role arXiv should play in my information diet. On the one hand I support Open Access research. On the other hand, peer review is vital, and a substantial quantity of “papers” on arXiv are just blog posts in a LaTeX trench coat.

Well, some blog posts are worth citing.

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#28

Post by emil-lp »

honzaik wrote: post #22
emil-lp wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which journal?

look at essentially any proceedings of any conference (in crypto we dont really do journals). see EUROCRYPT for example https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-91098-2 in there, every paper will be cut down and referring to full version for proofs etc. which are typically on eprint.iacr.org

Well, yes, conference proceedings are usually page limited, but that's not a journal.

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#29

Post by modeless »

m-hodges wrote: post #24

I always struggle to figure out what role arXiv should play in my information diet. On the one hand I support Open Access research. On the other hand, peer review is vital, and a substantial quantity of “papers” on arXiv are just blog posts in a LaTeX trench coat.

Do people browse arxiv or monitor new posts like reddit or something? I only visit when I encounter a link to it or when I search for a specific paper.

Re: ArXiv's Next Chapter

#30

Post by m-hodges »

montebicyclelo wrote: post #27
m-hodges wrote: post #24

I always struggle to figure out what role arXiv should play in my information diet. On the one hand I support Open Access research. On the other hand, peer review is vital, and a substantial quantity of “papers” on arXiv are just blog posts in a LaTeX trench coat.

Well, some blog posts are worth citing.

Of course some blog posts are worth citing. Then cite them as blog posts.

My point is that a LaTeX PDF can launder epistemic status. An unreviewed argument starts to look like established research merely because it adopts the visual grammar of a paper.

Post reply on HN