|
"Patrick McCray @patrickmccray.bsky.social If you're having a rough day, remember that in 1991 Tim Berners-Lee's paper for the World Wide Web was rejected and he was relegated to the poster session. https://bsky.app/profile/patrickmccray.bsky.social/post/3l4e4yrnt4u27 Woah 38 comments
 @impactology Many subfields and journals have an extremely narrow scope, tightly regulated terminology, and few who make governing editorial decisions. It's extremely common to find two different fields studying the exact same thing, but it sounds completely different the way they describe it, but both insisting that they are absolutely separate. Frequently researchers dust off an old idea, give it a new name and slightly different spin, and market it as innovation. @impactology Not defending the journals here, but doesn't this demonstrate that ideas can succeed even if they don't get recognized by the field experts?  Posters are hugely under-rated as a form of presentation. My advice to inexperienced scientific conference-goers would be to attend oral abstract sessions only if you're SURE you're interested, and otherwise spend the time looking at posters. It's much more efficient because you can dismiss most of them at a glance while thoroughly studying those that seem worth it (and then seeking out the presenter if you want to discuss further). @regordane @impactology This is the way. I’ve spent hours at poster exhibitions at SIGCHI, SIGGRAPH, and other international conferences. I often go there first & come back for any poster sessions to talk. I still think about some of them years later. That’s where much of the emerging innovation and experimentation is going on because it’s grad students working hard to do something new. That’s where most of the available people that organizations want to hire are hanging out too.  @impactology If only he had ammended "Markup is only one solution and should be regarded as temporary." @book @impactology This was the Hypermedia '91 conference. Mark Frisse made the decision to reject the paper. https://hapgood.us/2015/04/21/that-time-berners-lee-got-knocked-down-to-a-poster-session/  @skry @robinadams @book @impactology It's really interesting to me that theorists of a field would be witnessing an implementation massively taking off in practice and yet not embracing it because it did not properly conform to the theory @tomw @robinadams @book @impactology I was intrigued too. TBL was Doing It Wrong, plus he apparently wasn’t a proper hypermedia academic. It was partly I think alignment with Ted Nelson and partly being appalled that TBL’s worldwide hack was going viral without benefit of all the research they had done. Hell, it wasn’t even proper SGML. They awaited its inevitable death by hubris. @skry @impactology @tomw @robinadams @book Yeah, it's a bit of a "worse is better situation". Or perhaps Alan Kay's "perspective is worth 80 IQ points". @dunhamsteve @impactology @tomw @robinadams @book They had 10 years of various experimental systems that typically ran on one OS, with almost no users except themselves. How terribly wrong Mark Frisse turned out to be. Mark simply didn't have the foresight and imagination needed to see far reaching consequences of Tim's idea. https://archive.org/details/Munnecke-MarkFrissesMessageToTimBernersLee313 @robinadams @book @impactology I mean, the Web is a basic and not particularly novel hypermedia system, so this isn't surprising. The client-agnostic data bus, since effectively wiped out by the Web Platform; and embracing as inevitable, rather than trying so hard to avoid, broken links were it's main distinguishing features IIRC. It was successful because it was free and open and just bad enough, much like Linux. @impactology Once I had a paper reviewed by an anonymous referee who later admitted he had a few too many complimentary beverages on the airplane while reviewing. The handwriting was illegible and the editor insisted I respond to the review anyways. Welcome to academia.  A World Wide Web? Nah it’ll never work. It’s just gopher without any decent structure.   @impactology the genius bill gates wrote in his book that the internet was a "fad."   @impactology I don't know how many of you have actually USED the World Wide Web, but I gotta tell ya', it's not that great. Lotta Nazis in there! @impactology also a reminder of what posters used to look like - poor layout, no alignment, big spaces, pieces pinned up separately. (Current students would score ver poorly on presentation here)  Patrick McCray posted the same poster snapshot in mastodon a year ago – he also has a mastodon account: https://mathstodon.xyz/@LeapingRobot@mstdn.social/110458976999957718 @_dmh @impactology My thoughts exactly. Got told this story by Wendy Hall, and what she noted was rather how Tim's insistence at this poster session got the project rolling. @impactology maybe it was an early, poorly thought out, not clear to anyone product ? This is the kind of stuff that I was thinking about RE: 'what's water'. The tech/academic world lived in 'water' the web was so foreign as to be non-sensical. What ideas do you have that you dismiss out of hand because they don't fit into the water? I am actively trying to figure out what the water is and break out of it. Hat tip to all of you doing the same! via: @impactology @impactology |
Gregory's Server
What this reveals is that a field's threshold for innovation today is quite literally in the hands and mind of the field's journal editors.
So whole field can suffer with narrow minded unimaginative editors.
https://mastodon.social/@impactology/112690345023615919