Is novel research worth doing? Evidence from peer review

Nobody has figured out how to maximize individual outcome, or provide a channel for such pursuit. Period. Socialism has nothing to do with it. People are crap at managing more than a few dozen other people, even for the best managers who have ever lived. And the systems we have in place since agriculture took over are trying to manage many, many more people.

Most people in more developed countries live in partially socialist systems. This doesn't prevent them from getting private sector jobs, creating companies, and otherwise trying to pursue the maximization of their individual outcomes.

Honestly, I don't like opinions like this. That's just passing off the work that needs to be done to fix these problems. It wasn't even a hundred years ago when people published more in the open and the publish or perish paradigm didn't exist. The latter is a relatively tool, and collapsed because Goodhart's Law.

We can make the changes, but not with defeatist attitudes.

But even from this experiment we can see that there are people actively trying the fix the situation. Likely naive, but something is better than nothing. I wish there would be more push for ACs and Meta Reviewers having the highest standards, but this is where we are.

I am totally for us abandoning journals and conferences and just publishing to arxiv and open review. This is exactly what I would do if I was independently wealthy and could research without the constraints that I am in. But we also need to recognize the issues with this and that popularity and outreach ability greatly affect perceptions of quality of the paper. That this is not meritocratic.

Even if it takes decades.

Which is how long research labs take anyway.

Maybe this means something. Talk about HCI. Coming from a guy back in 1982 who thought pointing & clicking was pretty cool. Almost a decade before the mouse was widely recognized, the trackball/firing-button was in use industrially to select graphic items. At one of the control rooms of the most automated marine chemical installations at the time, they had consoles that looked like NASA Mission Control during the moon mission. Tied into their mainframes. And wired into their tank farms, pipelines, and ship docks. Well a somewhat humble oil company can have more money to spend on this kind of thing than NASA sometimes.

The oversize CRTs would have the sharp monochrome graphics showing little pictures of the available tanks on the left and available docks on the right. In between, connecting them, was the pipeline maze. Scattered across the pipelines were the little markers representing the control valves, which physically controlled where the product was going to go. They were like a little blank spot in the pipeline, just big enough so a cursor could go there and select it with a click so it would no longer be blank. Using a big console-mounted trackball like would appear years later on the Atari Millipede arcade game. And that would end up opening the valve so the product would flow through that segment. Until they had an unbroken line from tank to dock.

When your ship was coming in, you would co-ordinate the exact dock and tanks that were going to be involved, and after review the graphic layout would be executed physically in the field before measurement & testing could be directed for that vessel.

So I went home to my Atari computer, unplugged the Centipede cartridge and popped in the BASIC. Kept the home trackball with the regulation cueball plugged into a joystick port. Mocked up the console GUI in color since this is what really set new things like home Ataris apart from earlier plain-text machines, so besides basic graphics I got accustomed to pointing & clicking at home using my own code. No Mouse. Statically like I had seen. Really just one more step away from people intuitively pointing & clicking for targeting in Missile Command, which was the other main Atari game using the trackball.

I read a number of Atari books and experimented quite a bit and I could see that the truly fast games were really a product of deeper experience in things that I did not possess; immersion in the emerging microprocessor ecosystem, and very long hours of progress, which I could not compare to as a hobbyist. I wanted to make an accurate navigational Google-map type framework where the graphics would be first-person 3-D as you drove along realistic freeways. You would certainly want a racing mode, so that would be a bit of GTA style landmark navigation either way. Obvious idea, but that was really too much for me and my equipment.

Instead I did a much simpler slow-action logic game called Master Mind where you deduce the color pattern that the opposing player (or computer) has secretly encoded. You simply dragged & dropped the colors into position, and the computer answered.

So I was dragging & dropping quite a few years before most of the world had a mouse to point & click with in DOS. Heck, before most of them even had DOS. But it was really just one day's HCI work. What else are you going to do with the equipment? You're going to have to experiment for yourself. It's good not to be hampered by all the traditional academic obstacles.

I think nothing beats returns on inventions which have already been accomplished compared to research yet to be done, but the wisest investments are in the balanced performance of both. They go together so well.