Extremelly decentralized knowledge would rather be an interesting thing: many competing knowledge networks, instead of one.
-
-
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
One in a better knowledge network gets a huge boost. That’s why
@stanford > University of Stettin, even if the avg IQ of members the same.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
There’s still a meta-layer, though, such as communication protocols between these distributed knowledge networks, like, well,
#Blockchain.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
Equally so, computerized peer review won’t solve the problem in full. There’s still a meta-layer: body of knowledge shared by people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
Specifically, in the current world, papers essentially are a communication protocol between different knowledge networks.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
There’s no way to escape from this, unless one cuts off the communication, impoverishing everyone as a result.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
As a result, as long as knowledge is produced/consumed by people (no strong AI yet), the solution needs to focus on people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
The solution to “most of the research is wrong” involves more powerful tools grounded in methodology understood by people.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
Equally so, the solution involves incentiving valuable people to join, either by money, better tools or other means.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @z6lc7vj7v
Specifically, I’m probably highly biased but the ML methods are probably the good start.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
@z6lc7vj7v When your hammer is Mjölnir, maybe every problem really does become a nail ;)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.