Thus spake "curmudgeon"  :

>The fallibility of scientific journals.
> Publish and be wrong :
> http://www.economist.com:80/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12376658

I've had three papers published, and none have been refuted and one
was recently sourced in a paper I was referreing (author didn't know
who was doing it, obviously).  Almost 30 years later.

The validity of the research needs to be compared vs. the direct
benefit to the author.  I personally think that the results of a study
on cryptographic confidentiality conducted by a grad student might be
a little less circumspect than one conducted by a researcher at PGP.

Also, the article focuses on end product publication, not basic
research.

> ******************************************
>"We are what we repeatedly do,
>excellence then is not an act but a habit."
>*Aristotle*
> ****************************************** 
>
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32