2026-01-11 05:23:23

An article that received 1.59 million views sparked interesting reflections within the community. In the comments section, someone pointed out a noteworthy issue: a so-called AI researcher spends every day doing tasks like paper reading, model testing, and report writing, yet there is not a single code contribution record in their resume.

This is a bit awkward. In the AI field, there is a gap between "reading papers and writing analyses" and "actually turning ideas into products." Especially in the intersection of Web3 and AI, having only theoretical output without engineering implementation skills to verify it raises questions about the credibility of such a profile.

The comments reflect a collective intuition within the community: in an era of information explosion, anyone claiming to be an expert should be able to withstand questions like "what is your core capability." Talking on paper and practical operation are always two different things.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

PumpAnalyst

· 01-11 18:50

Talking about military strategy on paper is the easiest way to get into trouble in the crypto world. I really look down on "researchers" who have no code contributions. --- This is a typical pump-and-dump scheme. No matter how good the hype, without practical implementation, it's all talk. --- They haven't even held the support level and are still writing papers. That's funny. --- Ha, I told you, the technical aspect won't lie. Resumes can be deceptive, but code contributions can't be faked. --- Another "expert" hired by a whale. Fellow investors, open your eyes. --- This is the trap set by such people. I suggest risk control first, don't chase the high. --- It's incredible. No matter how solid the paper, without product validation, it's all nonsense. There are especially many such people in Web3. --- Another reason to be bearish. This rebound definitely hides many such characters. --- Only those who can truly implement their ideas are valuable. Others are just nonsense. Be careful and thoroughly verify before you get on board. --- Honestly, this exposes the core of the entire industry. I don't trust so-called researchers without code contributions.

View OriginalReply0

OnchainUndercover

· 01-11 05:53

Without solid coding skills, daring to call yourself a researcher is nothing new in Web3. There are always more people jumping on trends and riding the hype than those truly building; that's just how the industry is. Talking about theory on paper is indeed annoying, no different from those self-media accounts that only repost analyses. I’m really impressed by the move of having no code contributions on your resume; that’s a huge red flag. I suggest the community ask more questions to these kinds of people—have you really run a node? Alright, all you experts, I better take a good look at your GitHub. This is when you can see who’s a real player and who’s just riding the hype. Anyone can tell stories; have the guts to open-source a few projects. What Web3 really lacks is critical thinking like this—thumbs up. If you ask me, there are too many "experts" in AI + crypto fields; it’s time for a cleanup.

View OriginalReply0

rug_connoisseur

· 01-11 05:53

Talking about strategy on paper is a joke in Web3. No code, no product, just bragging—it's truly ridiculous.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainRetirementHome

· 01-11 05:37

Talking about strategies on paper has long been outdated in Web3. If you're truly capable, why haven't you made any commit records?

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationWizard

· 01-11 05:29

Talking about plans on paper doesn't work at all in Web3 There are too many people just hyping up things, we're all tired of it Only when the code is actually run and working does it count

View OriginalReply0

RuntimeError

· 01-11 05:25

There are indeed many armchair experts, but very few who can actually write code. Just bragging is useless; having a blank GitHub profile will only get you criticized. That's why I trust engineers, not analysts—code doesn't lie. Another "researcher"? I’d like to see their commit history. No matter how impressive the papers are, without product implementation, it's all just virtual.

View OriginalReply0