Hacker News Reader

Comment by th0ma5 | Hacker News Reader

Does the institute not also claim that work?

Fair enough. But for me, when talking about `having an insight`, I don't imagine a non-human entity doing that. And to be pedantic (talking about Germans doing research, I hope everyone would expect me to be), the institute is called Fraunhofer IIS. `Fraunhofer` would colloquially refer to the society, which is an organization with 76 institutes total. Although, of course, the society will also claim the work...

Bringing the right people together and having the right environment that gives rise to „having an insight“ can be a big part as well.

It's an interesting question, one I hadn't thought of before. But in common language, it sometimes makes sense to credit the institution, others just the individuals. I think may be more based around how much the institution collectively presents itself as the author and speaks on behalf of the project versus the individuals involved. Here is my own general intuition for a few contrasting cases:

Random forests: Ko and Breiman's, not really Bell Labs and UC-Berkeley

Transistors: Bardeen, Brattain, and Shockley, not really Bell Labs (thank the Nobel Prize for that)

UNIX: Primarily Bell Labs, but also Ken Thompson and Dennis Richie (this is a hard one)

GPT-n: OpenAI, not really any individual, and I can't seem to even recall any named individual from memory

btw, it is public funded non-profit organisation

Reply on news.ycombinator.com