Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

Re:Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architectu... by BurningFrog on Monday June 08, 2020 @08:37PM (#23462392)

I don't think science was unethical before Peer Review.

As I understand it, modern peer review came about as a 'crowd sourcing" solution to the hugely expanding number of articles to publish, in ever more specialized fields.

The journals couldn't keep enough relevant expertise around, so letting the scientists review each other was the simple fix.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architectu... by throwawayiionqz on Monday June 08, 2020 @11:30PM (#23463391)

This does not make sense.

Before scientists started reviewing each other, who at the journal was judging the work of scientists to be published? Scientists?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architectu... by BurningFrog on Monday June 08, 2020 @11:45PM (#23463455)

Well, science literate people working at the journal, I assume.

The point is that they did not have a conflict of interest.

In 2020 peer review, people are often asked to review the work of their rivals. So they're incentivized to (1) say that it's bad and demand many changes, and/or (2) steal their ideas.

[ Parent | on HN ]