Notice how they didn't try to do the same thing in a field they think isn't junk, in other words theyy jumped to conclusions with no control.
No, he just picked low hanging fruit. So he did nothing new and extraordinary. Big deal. The case against him is still bullshit grandstanding to divert attention away from their own problems.
And Iraq did 9/11... No, wait, Afghanistan did 9/11.. But we know that Saudi Arabia had absolutely nothing to do with it. He just went in to renew his passport.
The controls themselves need to be trustworthy, just like those reviewing journals. If you have to, you go all the way to the top. If the system were more open and transparent, I might lend some sympathy.
His feelings aren't hurt. You got it backwards. They are attacking him because their own feelings got hurt. He only executed a proof of concept, which was not false.
This guy, what he did. He chipped the Ivory Tower. The "case" against him is out of pure vengeance for exposing fallibility. This is, as been said thousands of times, a true *kill the messenger* story, and you seem to have your pitchfork ready too. Personally, if it goes through the courts, I see it as a real threat to what the republic is supposed to stand for. He did the right thing, and that's that. You all should let it go, and be more careful next time when reviewing journals for publishing.
This has to be the very definition of "First World Problems".
No, he pointed out that the purpose of peer review is to act as a very basic filter
Yeah, and by the numbers they get a "C". Not very good for the money they collect. A better filter would be his students, or some from a junior high school.
This is great. The defensiveness here is a story in itself.
Peer review is not robust to fraud because no one has figued out a practical way of making it so.
So what? Then they should take the occasional prank in stride. Only a bunch of stuffed shirt egos get bruised by it. The whole argument against him is nothing more than a shameless appeal to authority because somebody who feels important got embarrassed.
Well ok, if you find that failure rate acceptable, I can't argue. I simply expected better from people who claim to know so much more than the rest of us.
He wasn't wrong. He did the right thing, the right way. It is a triumph of good over evil. And will be better if he countersues for all costs and damages, and wins.
The publishers were exposed. The school is protecting them. Obviously there's a kickback. The charges are just more fraud on top the publications. Here's hoping for a nice big countersuit. It should have real legs.
Please, it's hardly an "edge case". That's like saying official corruption is isolated. This kind of stuff is systemic. The boss's arrogance has deep roots. Don't you dare challenge their authority and esteem!
Slashdot Mirror
Notice how they didn't try to do the same thing in a field they think isn't junk, in other words theyy jumped to conclusions with no control.
No, he just picked low hanging fruit. So he did nothing new and extraordinary. Big deal. The case against him is still bullshit grandstanding to divert attention away from their own problems.
And Iraq did 9/11... No, wait, Afghanistan did 9/11.. But we know that Saudi Arabia had absolutely nothing to do with it. He just went in to renew his passport.
The controls themselves need to be trustworthy, just like those reviewing journals. If you have to, you go all the way to the top. If the system were more open and transparent, I might lend some sympathy.
Sometimes you gotta do a "double blind" test to ensure nobody gets tipped off. He knew who he could trust.
His feelings aren't hurt. You got it backwards. They are attacking him because their own feelings got hurt. He only executed a proof of concept, which was not false.
Is what a thing?
This guy, what he did. He chipped the Ivory Tower. The "case" against him is out of pure vengeance for exposing fallibility. This is, as been said thousands of times, a true *kill the messenger* story, and you seem to have your pitchfork ready too. Personally, if it goes through the courts, I see it as a real threat to what the republic is supposed to stand for. He did the right thing, and that's that. You all should let it go, and be more careful next time when reviewing journals for publishing.
This has to be the very definition of "First World Problems".
No, he pointed out that the purpose of peer review is to act as a very basic filter
Yeah, and by the numbers they get a "C". Not very good for the money they collect. A better filter would be his students, or some from a junior high school.
This is great. The defensiveness here is a story in itself.
Don't be a putz! Is this really a thing? Not to rational people I suspect...
Fine, then ticket him for running a red light...
Didn't compare to nonsense article acceptance rates in other fields.
Maybe because the attack is on the field, or even philosophy itself? Lord knows they need it! They babble worse than astrologers.
Sorry, you're just defending authority. The argument has already been clarified enough so that anything I add now is mere repetition.
Peer review is not robust to fraud because no one has figued out a practical way of making it so.
So what? Then they should take the occasional prank in stride. Only a bunch of stuffed shirt egos get bruised by it. The whole argument against him is nothing more than a shameless appeal to authority because somebody who feels important got embarrassed.
There was no break in. The guy opened the door and got a pie in the face for believing bullshit.
Well ok, if you find that failure rate acceptable, I can't argue. I simply expected better from people who claim to know so much more than the rest of us.
Keeping everything is the most efficient use of my time.
Exactly, storage is too cheap to worry about it.
dir foo.bar /a /s finds all the foo.bars I have on the drive.
He wasn't wrong. He did the right thing, the right way. It is a triumph of good over evil. And will be better if he countersues for all costs and damages, and wins.
The publishers were exposed. The school is protecting them. Obviously there's a kickback. The charges are just more fraud on top the publications. Here's hoping for a nice big countersuit. It should have real legs.
The charge itself is untruthful, in spirit, if not letter. It is libelous and slanderous. I'm hoping it backfires spectacularly.
Then we can accuse them of being sloppy, not much else. The largeness of the case implies that somebody important lost a lot of money.
Bullshit, that what a "review" is supposed to do. This is all about protecting a golden goose. You shall not be taken seriously.
Sue for what, exactly?
He is being slandered for exposing fraud in the system. Why are you being so silly?
Poe's Law... Right?
those who can do neither go into politics
And then they win...
does not excuse his behavior.
Yes, it does. This is how you expose fraud in the system. You have a better way?
Please, it's hardly an "edge case". That's like saying official corruption is isolated. This kind of stuff is systemic. The boss's arrogance has deep roots. Don't you dare challenge their authority and esteem!