Why can’t the peer review system itself just evolve to embrace the full power of the internet? The main reasons these fraudulent strategies are at all effectiv

Why can’t the peer review system itself just evolve to embrace the full power of the internet? The main reasons these fraudulent strategies are at all effective is because (1) the review process is private and slow and (2) studies aren’t independently reproduced as a part of review. The feedback loop is inherently too slow. To speed it up, one must fight the inertia of senior (tenured) faculty and major funding vehicles. It’s laudible these researchers have invested so much in fighting fraud, but this post shows that the offenders will essentially face no negative consequences for fraud. The researchers worked very hard for hardly any return / justice. Perhaps it’s worth re-inventing science. Open reviews. A network to connect labs that ensures findings are reproduced. We could even re-do much of basic, academic science in the interest of improving exposition and shedding antiquated formulations of theory. What if, in the face of this fraud, we simply reject tradition wholesale? The only tradition should be an honest, reproducible study of Nature.