Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by quinndupont 85 days ago
How is nobody considering the broader political economy of scholarly publications and reviews? These are UNPAID reviews! Sure, maybe ICML isn’t Elsevier, but they are cousins to the socially parasitic and exploitative companies, at the very least.

Hiding behind a false “choice” to not use AI or basically not use AI isn’t an appropriate proposal. This is crooked and shameful. We should boycott ICML except we can’t because they are already the gatekeepers!
2 comments
bonoboTP 85 days ago
Your job as an academic is to disseminate your research and engage with the research community through service such as reviews, talks etc. It's part of the job, and people get a salary as university employees or company employees for this.

ML conferences aren't for profit ventures. If you submit papers and expect others to review it, you should reciprocate as well.

link
qbit42 85 days ago
What? Why is that a false choice? The only way you got caught here is if you literally gave an LLM the PDF and used its response verbatim.

And they didn't give a permanent ban or anything, these authors can just resubmit to another conference, of which there are many.

link
quinndupont 85 days ago
Imagine you are poor and a rich person offers you a choice to steal some bread or some beer. It’s not a real choice because you are poor and therefore steal. The rich person offering the choice is wrong.
link
qbit42 85 days ago
The choice was to review using AI or not, they can just say no? And review like we’ve done for years without AI tools.

Are you objecting to ICML’s reciprocal reviewing policy?

The alternative as I see it would be to charge for submissions and pay reviewers. There are pros but also clear cons when it comes to fairness.

link