On: Why isn't preprint review being adopted?

[freedomben]

Peer review is an important signal to potential citers. If everyone has to fully read and understand every paper in order to (responsibly) cite it, there's gonna be a lot less research. Given the exposure of how much bad research there is, maybe there does need to be a slowing and focus on quality, but I think we still need peer review, although it definitely need to be reformed somehow because it's clearly broken.

We need to take a serious look at the incentive structure in academia because it's not guaranteeing the scientific results that we expected it to. I don't think we should just abandon the system though.

[llm_trw → freedomben]

Peer review can be very simply replaced by skimming the abstract. If the abstract doesn't make sense the paper doesn't make sense either.

All the disciplines which use arxiv as their main journal are doing well enough without peer review.