The microblog: 2016.05.26 17:13:01

2016.05.26 17:13:01 (735851239758532608) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Anna Lysyanskaya (@AnnaLysyanskaya)" (735839255868678148):

Quote from censors re extra review time: "paper makes direct claims about errors in a published paper". Welcome to reality. @AnnaLysyanskaya


2016.01.25 04:04:51 (691456669159702531) from Daniel J. Bernstein:

Reviewing despicable examples of #eprintiacrorgcensorship. Starting to see a pattern: is it all about marketing IACR to funding agencies?

2016.01.27 10:32:18 (692278952338046977) from Daniel J. Bernstein:

Case study: An eprint submission was delayed two weeks, explicitly subjected to review because it pointed out errors in a Eurocrypt paper.

2016.05.26 16:25:24 (735839255868678148) from "Anna Lysyanskaya (@AnnaLysyanskaya)":

Few research organizations are more transparent than the IACR. Feedback helps, but conspiracy theories don't.