jakke said: This seems like he’s hoping referees will be sufficiently unfamiliar with the subject matter, no?
It’s a published piece; it landed in International Data Protection Law. And the people he acknowledges in the published piece are some of the experts who were – at the time, pre-Snowden – calling Swire’s article out for BS. I was at an event where his paper was critiqued as largely devoid of real, empirical, details which if included would have undermined many of the premises of the paper. But the paper was published (largely unchanged) regardless.
But peer-review…still not broken, am I right?
Excited Pixels 