[cap-talk] "ACLs don't" paper rejected from Oakland 09
mikesamuel at gmail.com
Sat Jan 31 19:28:39 EST 2009
2009/1/31 Steve Witham <sw at tiac.net>
> >From: David Wagner <daw at cs.berkeley.edu>
> >Some of my favorite papers I've ever
> >read have been "principles" papers. For instance, the paper introducing
> >and arguing for the end-to-end principle is a classic systems paper that
> >has had significant influence, and certainly impressed me when I first
> >read it. If I remember my anecdotes correctly, that paper was rejected
> >twice before being eventually accepted, and was controversial at the time.
> "Gotos considered harmful." But a Gotos only comes around once in a
> great while. You would have to be already well-respected & write a
> good screed. Btw, Google only returns one hit for "ACLs considered
> harmful" http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~410/lectures/L32_Protection.pdf<http://www.cs.cmu.edu/%7E410/lectures/L32_Protection.pdf>
> and it's a page (about EROS) that's been taken down (but in Google's
> cache at the moment).
> >Tyler Close wrote:
> >> If it is true that it is hard to publish a paper that only evaluates
> >> existing mechanisms, rather than proposing new mechanisms, that would
> >> go a long way towards explaining why poor mechanisms survive and
> >> thrive for so long in this field once they take hold.
> >They wanted to know what to do: who could they tell to
> >make sure the record gets corrected? The answer is, often, nothing.
> >They didn't like that answer much, and I don't blame them, but that's
> >how it works.
> "It" being peer review for conferences and journals. A mechanism that's
> meant to deal with the situation where
> it's already hard to get something published (or onto a stage)
> it's hard to attach a criticism to something already published
> it's easier to pre-filter than post-filter
> What you're saying is that the system itself discourages trying to
> use it for post-filtering.
Might a wiki-like annotation system that parallels citeseer help provide a
way to collect and disseminate corrections and criticisms on published
Tyler, you might write a survey of ACL-based errors in
> papers in that conference's recent proceedings. Nyuk nyuk.
> Maybe find a paper that criticizes ACLs and plot error frequency for
> some number of years before and after that paper.
> cap-talk mailing list
> cap-talk at mail.eros-os.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cap-talk