To me there is one important difference between powerful ideas and ideas that are merely correct. Powerful ideas are transferrable. Powerful ideas are usually also correct to a certain degree, but the mindless pursuit of pedantic correctness can often be counterproductive.

Great ideas are great because of their influence on other ideas, and as such are necessarily powerful. In fact, I believe that many great ideas do not even have correct first incarnations. The fact that they are powerful allows the thinker to patch up superficial inconsistencies or realize that another important problem had in fact been solved. I believe great novelty and robustness often exists outside of details.

It is good to have a nose for powerful ideas. I have seen plenty of the opposite: correct solutions that require so much tedious, error-prone, slow, detailed work that they do not empower the reader at all. Worse still, there are those who are oblivious to this kind of failure, and who continue to pour effort into repetitive drudgerous tasks. These tasks are done only once, but are classified as repetitive in my mind because in doing them one does not learn how to do them any faster.

Of course, in completing the same task two people could learn really different lessons, what's repetitive to one may not be repetitive to another.

Article about how it really doesn't make sense to go into academia.. I can't seem to refute this, haha.

Just saw the best argument against DRM today on Slashdot.

Opportunist (166417):

DRM does not only prevent copies. It allows you to retroactively void information, provided you have power over the keys to that information. If an information is no longer to be viewable, it can be erased. Including the copy you have on your computer. Its key is no longer valid, you can no longer view it. No, you couldn't print it in the first place to have a hard copy that can't be erased.

DRM is, in fact, the ability to recreate and reshape statements. While it won't be as blatant as in 1984, where the announcer changes the name of the enemy mid sentence, it is going to be used, albeit more subtle. Whistleblowing will be incredibly hard, since you won't have any evidence to back up your claim. The evidence you had will vanish, since there won't be a key to unlock it anymore when you need it. Your key, the key you used when you were still allowed to view the information, will be deleted.

DRM is BY FAR more than the "threat" that we won't be able to use our CD writers anymore. The real danger is that you can commit a crime and pretty much flush any evidence, if you're in a position of power to create and delete keys to it.