Posted by: jonkatz | July 29, 2009

The (dis)advantages of blogging about research

In my previous post I discussed some recent work of mine. In a comment, someone pointed out a preprint that essentially solves the same problem and kills our result. (Thanks!)

The conclusion (thanks to Dov Gordon for putting it this way): blogging about research — good for science, not so good for publishing papers. =)



  1. On the positive side, this example is actually a good argument for why “research blogs” can be so valuable for the community and fill in the hole that other research venues fail to.

  2. Better to find out now rather than from a review.

  3. May help explain why some of the most active research blogs seem to come from people with tenure already. 🙂

  4. The only NON-TENURED theory-bloggers I know of are SORELLE and Andy Drucker- both students.
    So perhaps its a U-shaped thing: Only
    but those working on Tenure do not.
    Is there a counterexample?
    (There might be once Sorelle or Andy Graduates.)

  5. Scott Aaronson is not tenured, is he? but he is indeed unique

  6. Adam Smith?

  7. Mihai Patrascu

  8. Mihai is at a research lab. Seems a little odd to refer to him as “not tenured” in this context, since he’s not actively working on tenure in his current job. Of course he could transition to a different job with tenure or on tenure track later.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: