6 ms·

"To appear"

by neatze 5y ago

"To appear"

JadeNB 5y ago
"To appear" has a technical meaning in academia, though—it doesn't mean "I hope"; it means "it's been formally accepted but hasn't actually been put in 'print' yet." That doesn't stop someone from lying about it, but it's not a casual claim, and doing so would probably bring community censure (as well as being easily falsifiable after time).
- neatze 5y ago
  "To appear" to me meant; it is under revision by IEEE, otherwise why not just to state paper was accepted by IEEE.
  - flakiness 5y ago
    It's a jargon in academia.
  - andi999 5y ago
    It is a bit more complicated, since this is a conference paper. Usually, if a conference paper is accepted, it is only published if the presentation was held (so if the speaker cancels, or doesnt show up, the publication is revoked). Edit: All conference are different, I dont know if it applies to that one.
    - neatze 5y ago
      It makes sense, thank you for explanation.
    - cardiffspaceman 5y ago
      I have only ever attended one conference, but I attended it about 32 times, and the printed proceedings were in my hands before I attended any talks in the last dozen or so. How does revocation work in that event?
      - andi999 5y ago
        Well, it depends on the conference. I know this to be true for a certain IEEE conference, so I assumed it to be the same for this IEEE one, but I have to admit, I didnt check. You are right, I also remember the handouts at a different conference handed on a usb stick at arrival.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
detaro 5y ago
What are you trying to suggest? It's an accepted paper, the event just hasn't happened yet.
corty 5y ago
I'm not holding my breath. I don't think they will pull that paper. Security research is not always the most ethical branch of computer science, to say it mildly. Those are the people selling exploits to oppressive regimes, allowing companies to sit on "responsibly reported" bugs for years while hand-wringing about "that wasn't in the attacker model, sorry our 'secure whatever' we sold is practically useless". Of course the overall community isn't like that, but the bad apples spoil the bunch. And the aforementioned unethical behaviour even seems widely accepted.

"To appear"

by neatze 5y ago

"To appear"

"To appear" has a technical meaning in academia, though—it doesn't mean "I hope"; it means "it's been formally accepted but hasn't actually been put in 'print' yet." That doesn't stop someone from lying about it, but it's not a casual claim, and doing so would probably bring community censure (as well as being easily falsifiable after time).

neatze 5y ago
"To appear" to me meant; it is under revision by IEEE, otherwise why not just to state paper was accepted by IEEE.
- flakiness 5y ago
  It's a jargon in academia.
- andi999 5y ago
  It is a bit more complicated, since this is a conference paper. Usually, if a conference paper is accepted, it is only published if the presentation was held (so if the speaker cancels, or doesnt show up, the publication is revoked). Edit: All conference are different, I dont know if it applies to that one.
  - neatze 5y ago
    It makes sense, thank you for explanation.
  - cardiffspaceman 5y ago
    I have only ever attended one conference, but I attended it about 32 times, and the printed proceedings were in my hands before I attended any talks in the last dozen or so. How does revocation work in that event?
    - andi999 5y ago
      Well, it depends on the conference. I know this to be true for a certain IEEE conference, so I assumed it to be the same for this IEEE one, but I have to admit, I didnt check. You are right, I also remember the handouts at a different conference handed on a usb stick at arrival.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

detaro 5y ago

What are you trying to suggest? It's an accepted paper, the event just hasn't happened yet.

corty 5y ago

I'm not holding my breath. I don't think they will pull that paper. Security research is not always the most ethical branch of computer science, to say it mildly. Those are the people selling exploits to oppressive regimes, allowing companies to sit on "responsibly reported" bugs for years while hand-wringing about "that wasn't in the attacker model, sorry our 'secure whatever' we sold is practically useless". Of course the overall community isn't like that, but the bad apples spoil the bunch. And the aforementioned unethical behaviour even seems widely accepted.