srouhaewaehy
Then as engineer what can you do? Either assume toxic Management (and switch Jobs) or do a subset of what you would usually do, and that means optimize for your own browser first and only work on bugs known to your management for the other browsers.
If you work in the field you know the 10-100 people who provide most expertise and you can build trust relationships with them by delivering interesting thoughts and then get their feedback on These ideas. That's the healthy approach. And if you work hard and the stuff you do is reasonable you will also become known in these circles.
Also technology can help weed out the complete b.s., see HN or Stackoverflow for examples on that.
So, why would you want "proper" peer review nowadays? It should be a means to achieve something else. Just for the challenge?
I mean besides arXiv there are many ways you can get your knowledge out there if you want to give people free (or even paid) access to it. This will also create a lot of Feedback if it's the least bit interesting.
If you want your knowledge to generate new products and companies you will also find that Startups nowadays don't wait for peer review before they launch.
So the only practical reason I can see is if you want to get funding. And Then you use the funding to create more papers. To… well… get more funding.
TL;DR: If you think about that you want to have "proper" peer review meaybe you should spend some time thinking about what you actually want to achieve and if there aren't better ways to get there.