Re: poly: Idea Futures, some questions

From: Peter C. McCluskey <>
Date: Thu May 21 1998 - 08:31:58 PDT ("Nick Bostrom") writes:
>Why would the prestigious journals not publish an explanation of
>these insights if their readers would like to read it? And if they
>don't, doesn't that create space for a new journal to crop up and
>gain prestige?

 One example that I think is fairly common in computer science:
I try implementing a new idea, and the results indicate it was a waste
of my time. A few people would like to read about this to avoid duplicating
this waste. Publication in some obscure place will simply advertise my
poor judgement about what ideas to implement. Publication in the best
journals might carry enough prestige to offset that disadvantage, but
journals don't acquire that prestige by publishing reports of failures.

 I agree that idea futures markets tend to promote secrecy more than
alternatives do.

Peter McCluskey          | Critmail ( | Accept nothing less to archive your mailing list
Received on Thu May 21 15:48:48 1998

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 07 2006 - 14:45:30 PST