4 ms·
I've read this post - broadly, I agree very much with it. Unfortunately, inertia is a hell of a thing. Science is stuck with peer review for a few more decades
by icelancer 4y ago
I've read this post - broadly, I agree very much with it.
Unfortunately, inertia is a hell of a thing. Science is stuck with peer review for a few more decades at the very least. Many postgrads would do unspeakable things and commit various crimes to become a first author on a paper accepted into Nature, for example. It just means everything to academics.
arXiv is the biggest undermining threat to the professional peer review process, but in a weird way, it also bolsters it.
Anyway, at least Computer Science doesn't care much about academic journals. Hacker culture remains fairly strong.
- colonwqbang 4y ago> arXiv is the biggest undermining threat to the professional peer review process, but in a weird way, it also bolsters it. How do you mean?
- JPLeRouzic 4y agoI am a layperson but I guess arXiv moderation is not different from peer-review. Some authors have voiced concern over the lack of transparency in the arXiv screening process. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArXiv#Moderation_process_and_endorsement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArXiv#Moderation_process_and_e...