Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem • Hacker News Board

Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem

#201

Post by Grue3 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:56 AM UTC

whitecream wrote: post #190

JorgeGT wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can send it to a journal as a private individual, but probably a better way would to post a manuscript on arxiv.org, and once it generates certain buzz (if the problem is interesting and well solved) then either submit it to a journal yourself or partner with other mathematician to polish it, etc. and then submit.

To be able to submit to arXiv, one needs to be endorsed by someone in the domain, which could be a potential hurdle for someone not in academia. (and I'm not about to suggest viXra as a way to get around that)

Yeah, I actually used to be a math post-graduate and have a draft of a paper with an interesting result, so I wanted to publish it but I had no idea how to get "endorsed". This was like 10 years ago and I switched to a career in programming so I doubt I'll even understand my own proof now.

Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem

#202

Post by Certhas » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:57 AM UTC

neuromantik8086 wrote: post #194

Certhas wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's good to keep in mind that reviewers do not make the decision. They recommend the decision. The Editor, who knows the identity of the reviewer, can see if a reviewer is asking for unreasonable citations. So while this definitely does happen (and to different degrees in different fields) there are some checks and balances, too.

True, and your overall point (that it is better than the alternative; i.e. viXra) stands. It's really one of those things where ymmv depending on the field- I just happened to notice a somewhat disheartening tendency for those sorts of horse trading practices to creep in, which is ultimately one of the major reasons why I left science. I could be naive, but my impression was that there are almost too many degrees of…

Completely agreed. I think the system is ripe for an overhaul, and has many problematic aspects. We'll see how it goes, after all it doesn't look too bad with the open access revolution.

I personally would like more use of pre-registration (there is something about that on the front-page right now. But also I think deanonymzing peer review and publishing the reviews along with the papers could be very interesting. Obvious drawbacks as well of course but I think it has potentially massive upsides.

Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem

#203

Post by fs111 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 12:10 PM UTC

kotajacob wrote: post #79

fs111 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

citing "anonymous", if it is unclear who the author is, is nothing new. I did that a long time ago when I a cited something from the nmap man page in a paper for university . Back then it was unclear - at least to me - who the author is. This is a very common practice. I do not see, where the novelty is.

Nowadays you could simply check with git blame right?

if it was just a pseudonym, one may still cite it as anonymous.

Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem

#204

Post by creative1thr » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 8:24 PM UTC

jhallenworld wrote: post #70

Back in the 90s there was the same discussion involving citing USENET news postings. I would suggest that some of the news postings were better peer reviewed than Journal articles. There was certainly a time when the top academics of certain fields were USENET junkies. I suppose hacker news is the most recent equivalent.

>I suppose hacker news is the most recent equivalent.

It looks like 4chan may be the most recent equivalent : )

Re: Nobody knows how to cite 4chan mathematicians who solved an interesting problem

#205

Post by Nomentatus » Fri, Oct 26, 2018, 2:22 AM UTC

zmw wrote: post #200

Nomentatus wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's up to professors. I've had very important work taken by professors and published by them from my websites without attribution - even my own old professors! They think theft is fine if you aren't a fellow pirate, apparently. Arxiv is used by fellow pirates, so it's off limits, on this view.

That sounds mighty weird, and honestly the statement has certain characteritics that trigger my crackpot alarm (don’t take it personally)... If what you say is true, it’s not like you don’t have recourse — you can write to the publication’s editorial board, or report to your department or institution’s academic disciplinary body (of course, that’s after you have contacted whomever you’re in dispute with; it’s okay, a…

This is common stuff, and good luck on prompt action! No, I wasn't working for a prof - but note that you yourself just accept that work including ideas can be published by a prof without attribution to the discoverer! That tells us all where the academic mindset is. My noting is your whining, I gather. One can't tarry on life's path to upbraid all the assholes in the world, and legal redress is well out of reach of most of us. One can note it to warn others, and move on.