Hacker News Reader

Science is a method of inquiry, not an institution or group of people with titles.

Sure, but it is good that people actually adhere to that method if inquiry.

They are not perfect, but institutions like peer review or universities do provide a framework and incentives for quality.

Eh. Peer review isn't central to science. The point of peer review is: you have a claim someone makes; if it's been peer-reviewed, you can build further research on it without having verify the claim yourself. If you're building technology directly, any result you use you're going to verify inherently, because it either works as advertised or your tech doesn't work. The external verification doesn't add that much in that case.

Peer review isnt central, but it doesn't try to ensure a method is being followed.

If you are spending time, money, and risk based on a claim, verification still helps to cull info that is deceptive or done with methods so shoddy it might as well be lying.

Sure, you can verify through your failures, but that isnt great. You company goes belly up and you can confidently say the blog was bullshit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com