This is terrible even by New Scientist standards. I do wish they’d stop writing up random arXiv ramblings as if they’d even passed basic peer review. (Conference proceedings generally haven’t.)
I’m not sure what conference proceedings you’ve been looking at, but the ones I’ve managed to publish in generally do have basic peer review (I know because I got comments back from the reviewers).
Though, whether or not the quality of peer review done by conferences is any good is another matter entirely.
This is terrible even by New Scientist standards. I do wish they’d stop writing up random arXiv ramblings as if they’d even passed basic peer review. (Conference proceedings generally haven’t.)
I’m not sure what conference proceedings you’ve been looking at, but the ones I’ve managed to publish in generally do have basic peer review (I know because I got comments back from the reviewers).
Though, whether or not the quality of peer review done by conferences is any good is another matter entirely.