h a l f b a k e r yNot from concentrate.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
There is presently a huge amount of energy
expended
in arguing various points of view over the internet.
These arguments may often end in novel ideas and
useful statements about the world. However they're
never ever taken seriously because they lack rigor
and
aren't undertaken by people
with the right initials
after their names.
This internet forum would attempt to distill various
internet arguments into a high-quality journal of
science.
As people create, revise, and bicker over various
topics, and statements containing links to peer-
reviewed journals would be automatically be culled.
A
computer would be assigned the task of deciding
whether the linked journal actually supported the
argument.
When enough similar and high-quality statements
about a particular topic were collected they would
be
automatically compiled into a paper and the paper
published. Published papers would be prominently
displayed for users to begin bickering over again.
In this way the common man can contribute
meaningfully to man's knowledge of the universe in
his
spare time.
This is different from Wikipedia in that people
wouldn't get to pick and choose and change papers.
The only consideration would be whether claims are
well supported.
[link]
|
| |
Same thing we do every day Pinky... |
|
| |
The fact that poop contains small bits of food does
not improve the chances of producing food from
poop. |
|
| |
The fact that internet diatribes contain references
to articles by people that really do have the right
initials after their names does not mean that
diatribe authors have those initials, or have any
greater prospects of writing things that make sense. |
|
| |
If this was redirected to require that an experiment be devised to test the ideas at issue before it went any further, maybe you'd be onto something. The paper and ink of the journals, or the certificates of the writer don't matter half as much as the experiments they describe. |
|
| |
In fact lots of little half-baked experiments slip through during the certification stage of your paper-producer's career that might have meant more, had the sample size been just a bit bigger. Maybe an ideas forum could help there, where consensus that an experiment is well designed, and seems to have a usefulness beyond just the securing of a certificate, is what determines whether the forum members become willing to each do their little bit to scale the experiment up sufficiency. |
|
| |
This might even work for some of the more hard-pressed journals. |
|
| |
... But what planet am I now imagining we come from? |
|
| |
Really the chances of anyone actually Doing this are ludicrously small -- although you're welcome to come up with evidence (by experiment) that refutes this assertion. |
|
| |