At one time, I looked toward open peer-review as a remedy for deceptive ('predatory') publishing practices whose greatest sin (in my estimation) was the facade of rigorous review.

A.I. changes that equation since a plausible reviewer report can easily be spat out and made public...

April 04, 2026 - 02:12 UTC

1
0
3
That may not be the worst outcome in the world if the reviews are obviously flawed or silly. But what if they are at least average? Or even slightly above average?
1
0
0
One of my bits on twitter was the idea of a performance art bit where you flooded an obviously fake/predatory journal with high quality submissions and dedicated expert reviewers, thus hijacking it into a passable journal.
1
0
0