From slashdot:






peer-review is overrated (Score:4, Insightful)

by EccentricAnomaly on Tuesday May 21, @01:46PM (#3559706)

(User #451326 Info | http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday December 16, @05:28PM)

I've gone through peer-review several times and it's mostly an exercise of massaging the egos of people in the field who are 'respected' just for being in the field for so long and who haven't really produced anything new in their lauded carreers. You go through a ton of busywork making sure you have the right damn font and you have all of the right people referenced (whehter or not you actually used their papers) and you get paid nothing, the journal takes your copyright and charges you $10 to make fair use copies of your own damn paper.



In academia, if you have a good idea someone will steal it, if you have a great idea they will dismiss you without listening to it. If you don't believe me, look into whether or not Watson and Crick _really_ discovered the structure of DNA or if it was a grad student who's ideas they orginally dismissed.



In academia there's this absurd notion that if someone understands your explanation of a new idea that they somehow helped you come up with it.



So Bravo to Wolfram for thumbing his nose at academia! I just hope he can back it up.