Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 203 posts

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#171

Post by amznthrowaway5 »

effie wrote: post #53
jjjjjj__ wrote: post #9

Fraud? Are you kidding me? I have publication in MICRO with a very famous institution in US. (Top 20). You know how my professor published his paper in MICRO? Relationship! Relationship! Relationship! As a graduate student coming from a third world country, I totally lost my hope on the system when I saw a venue as famous as MICRO, is only based on relationship. Don’t judge me, who can I report it? I am graduate stud…

I wanted to do theoretical science, after few years at the university, seeing how corrupt the system and the people are, and tired of living in such an environment, I wrapped up after master degree. Best decision of my life. I recommend getting out as soon as reasonable, then get a real job, do science in your free time or as part of a real job. Better work/life balance, higher self-esteem, putting up with and fixing…

Unfortunately the data science craze has resulted in a lot of these corrupt academic politician types coming into industry, so you definitely don't want to go into "machine learning" if you want to see decency.

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#172

Post by kortilla »

dlkf wrote: post #143
kortilla wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That suicide is so unfortunate. As someone who was a PhD student, I understand the perceived gravity of the situation for him. It’s unfortunate he had nobody to put it in perspective. This is one of the fields that you can easily leave academia for industry or even switch to another academic institution with ease if things start to go bad. Nobody but your own advisor will realistically care about a retracted paper (e…

"academic politics are so vicious because the stakes are so small"

Mmmm. Is that a reference to Billions or did they lift it from somewhere else?

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#173

Post by fdupress »

taneq wrote: post #156
throwawayiionqz wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even easier to trick the authors into believing you (the reviewer) is someone else. E.g: ask the authors to cite two papers of another researcher (as was mentioned somewhere in the thread as making it easy to guess who the reviewer is), ask to compare to results of that researcher more thoroughly, use some writing style typical of that researcher country of origin, etc. It's especially easy if you are familiar w…

Is a reviewer asking an author to cite their own paper not a massive conflict of interest in itself?

Only if it's irrelevant. If it's relevant, it's a necessary correction.

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#174

Post by amznthrowaway5 »

mnwsth wrote: post #141
jjjjjj__ wrote: post #9

Fraud? Are you kidding me? I have publication in MICRO with a very famous institution in US. (Top 20). You know how my professor published his paper in MICRO? Relationship! Relationship! Relationship! As a graduate student coming from a third world country, I totally lost my hope on the system when I saw a venue as famous as MICRO, is only based on relationship. Don’t judge me, who can I report it? I am graduate stud…

You should report it to SIGARCH executive. More information on this blog post https://www.sigarch.org/other-announcements/joint-investigat...

You really shouldn't, those people are likely corrupt as well and may get you deported.

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#175

Post by idoeestuff »

pbzcnepu wrote: post #169
obmelvin wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just want to thank you for your actions and ask if you have any advice for career paths to do something about this type of academic bullshit. My GF is currently pursuing a PhD in biochem but very interested in pursuing science policy so that she can do something about all the injustice one witnesses as a graduate student. As someone who received both their B.S. and M.S. at UIUC, I'm honestly disgusted at how variou…

there's really not much one can do. In Comp Arch, most of the honest people left the field years ago because they got sick of all this nonsense. Most were happy to let those left behind play their silly peer-review games, but when the student suicide happened it was like a call to action. It is easier to fight things from the outside, as the internal higher-ups have less power to mess up your life. It's interesting y…

can you expand? i know the clique, but at least for the specific work i follow, the work isn't bad recently.

of course, nothing surprises me.

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#176

Post by wegs »

SoylentOrange wrote: post #167
wegs wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I had a great time in my Ph.D program. My advisor was the very model of caring about students and integrity. I did good research which I was proud of (but which had very little impact since at the time I didn't know how to sell / position it well) I see the upsides of a functioning academia. My cynicism doesn't come from a lack of understanding of the academy or the good parts of the academy. To the contrary; i…

One of my friends leads artifact evaluation for USENIX Sec. It's an emerging but I think valuable addition to the peer-review process in CS. There's been a growing movement, which I very much like, for improved reproducibility. Here's an example from NeurIPS: https://towardsdatascience.com/reproducible-machine-learning... ^ As you know, many areas of science have a reproducibility crisis including psychology and medi…

I think we're long past that point. We need to realign incentive structures and see wholesale change. You'll never see quality peer reviews on an honor system, with no incentives to do quality. The basic concept is broken. It's much better to let people publish as they do research, and have post-hoc reviews, revisions, and discussions.

And for transparency, I'm not going to trust any research out of MIT research until MIT openly gets rid of NDAs and non-disparage agreements. Just no. Yuck. And that includes the chains of corporate walls MIT has built up to hide stuff.

I won't trust MIT research until I can file a public records request, and get records. I should be able to discover conflicts-of-interest, financial arrangements, and all the other messes MIT gets itself into.

I won't trust MIT research until faculty meetings are subject to open meeting laws, and the public can sit in on them and understand how decisions get made.

I won't trust MIT research until data, source code, and papers are out in the sun for public review by anyone.

I won't trust MIT research until I see bad actors getting disciplined and these things publicly discussed.

Until then, unless I know something at MIT isn't corrupt, I'll just assume it might be. I won't trust Stanford either. Too much stuff is simply fabricated to tell a good story. Heck, I won't trust a lot of the elite academy, since I assume it's just as bad. Things get a little bit better one tier down, but the rot is starting to seep in.

MIT CSAIL just shut down its main mailing list -- thousands of people -- since people started discussing institutional corruption.

Footnote: I had no problem living on my similar stipend. I paid for one bedroom in a four-bedroom apartment, ate cheap food, and didn't spend much otherwise. My university

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#177

Post by idoeestuff »

ISL wrote: post #75
ridv wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know how people are protesting the structural policing systems in the US in part because the systems seem like they're built to protect police instead of holding them accountable? It's been my experience that tenure provides something similar in academia. As a lowly grad student, even in the most outrageous of cases, you aren't likely to succeed in bringing these issues to light. It would take tremendous determin…

There is an option C): Switch advisors. As long as the department is sympathetic to the student's complaint, it will accommodate the switch if it can. Furthermore, there is increasing attention to providing "Faculty Mentors" -- people of faculty rank who are emphatically not the student's advisor, tasked in that capacity with advocating for the student's needs alone. Look within the University for other outlets for y…

what dept are you in where faculty wouldn't support each other? surely the powerful faculty usually are the ones with the grants coming in, sometimes funding the other faculty (at least the dept/university).

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#178

Post by antonvs »

dlkf wrote: post #143
kortilla wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That suicide is so unfortunate. As someone who was a PhD student, I understand the perceived gravity of the situation for him. It’s unfortunate he had nobody to put it in perspective. This is one of the fields that you can easily leave academia for industry or even switch to another academic institution with ease if things start to go bad. Nobody but your own advisor will realistically care about a retracted paper (e…

"academic politics are so vicious because the stakes are so small"

Except the impact on people's reputation, livelihood, and lives are not really small stakes.

I think that quote comes partially from the perspective of someone who doesn't recognize the nature of the stakes because they're different, not because they're smaller - if it was really intended as much more than a snarky critique of academia.

It's not as if everything outside of academia somehow involves much higher stakes. You could basically dismiss the whole of Google or Facebook as being small stakes, following similar logic.

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#179

Post by antonvs »

kortilla wrote: post #172
dlkf wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"academic politics are so vicious because the stakes are so small"

Mmmm. Is that a reference to Billions or did they lift it from somewhere else?

Google "Sayre's Law"

Re: Potential organized fraud in ACM/IEEE computer architecture conferences

#180

Post by idoeestuff »

pphysch wrote: post #39
rshnotsecure wrote: post #19

This was a long time coming. A quick look at the historical DNS records for IEEE.org shows there have been strange things going on for some time. Recently, OpenSSL unveiled a new "notification" policy that gave massive preference to Huawei and Smartisans [1]. They are OpenSSL's largest donors. The process by how this was done was kind of laughably deceptive, which of course aroused further suspicion. Many things have…

Please keep the sinophobia out of HN. Thanks.

is it sinophobic to see that dac is now a "top conference" because of chinese influence?
Post reply on HN