• Ralph Merkle used his Levchin Prize acceptance speech at Real World Crypto to argue that committee-based peer review is broken and should be replaced, ironically suggesting the replacement be vetted by the same peer-review process.

• Participants debated whether academic peer review is sustainable, noting that reviewers receive neither credit nor compensation and that the volume of papers requiring review is growing faster than the volunteer labor supply.

• The conversation highlighted how cryptography is unusually well-served by peer review because commercial incentives force implementers to scrutinize work aggressively, yet errors still slip through.

• A link was shared to a transcript titled “Journals as Clubs,” proposing that academic publishing should be rethought as selective clubs rather than universal archives to reduce review burden.

• PubPeer was discussed as an emerging platform for post-publication critique, with examples of legal threats against anonymous commenters illustrating the political and contentious nature of open review.

• South Park’s satirical take on 23andMe was circulated, mocking consumer genetic testing and its social implications.

• A New York Times Magazine article on gene-drive mosquitoes was shared, emphasizing the unsettling normalcy of mosquitoes engineered to spread engineered DNA through wild populations.

• Discussion of a retracted or disputed GMO study underscored concerns about sensationalist headlines and the reliability of scientific reporting in mainstream media.

• Participants questioned why finding insecticide-resistant insects after applying insecticide should be framed as a “horror” rather than an expected evolutionary response.