I was hoping what was said would be easily interpreted but I was incorrect. I'll revise to "putting on ArXiv doesn't mean peers haven't reviewed it."
For what constitutes "a peer", I describe more here[0]. The definition varies wildly, and it is not an easy problem to determine who is even qualified to review a work. Hell, it can be hard to determine if you yourself are qualified to review a work!
While I advocate for mostly abandoning the journals and conferences (or dramatic restructuring), I won't act like there's no problems with just publishing to ArXiv (or more preferably, OpenReview, since it allows commenting). But the truth is that there's no globally optimal solution to this problem. I just think the benefits outweigh the costs here. Frankly, most authors aren't publishing (posting on ArXiv or whatever) in bad faith. If anything, I think our current system incentivizes bad faith publishing, but that's a larger conversation (coupled with this one but requires talking about a few other factors).
Frankly, we just waste a lot of time and effort for little to no gain (possibly even for losses).
That makes your intention much more clear, and I am inclined to agree. A paper should not be dismissed as mere prose on the fact that it was published via ArXiv alone.
I was hoping what was said would be easily interpreted but I was incorrect. I'll revise to "putting on ArXiv doesn't mean peers haven't reviewed it."
For what constitutes "a peer", I describe more here[0]. The definition varies wildly, and it is not an easy problem to determine who is even qualified to review a work. Hell, it can be hard to determine if you yourself are qualified to review a work!
While I advocate for mostly abandoning the journals and conferences (or dramatic restructuring), I won't act like there's no problems with just publishing to ArXiv (or more preferably, OpenReview, since it allows commenting). But the truth is that there's no globally optimal solution to this problem. I just think the benefits outweigh the costs here. Frankly, most authors aren't publishing (posting on ArXiv or whatever) in bad faith. If anything, I think our current system incentivizes bad faith publishing, but that's a larger conversation (coupled with this one but requires talking about a few other factors).
Frankly, we just waste a lot of time and effort for little to no gain (possibly even for losses).
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44587535