maybe if IEEE wanted to keep students, they could support them, unlike during the 2019 ISCA peer review fraud incident where an IEEE fellow was caught in peer review fraud that lead to a student's death, and essentially it took years of intense pressure for them to stop allowing a cover up, do a minimal investigation, and in the end most of the people involved got a secret punishment that was likely a minimal slap-on-the-wrist at best
you should notice that the professor involved is listed as being on the Program Committee for IEEE S&P 2022 already, meaning he must be well-connected with various higher ups at the conference. This is probably why they are reluctant to remove the paper. There were similar issues with the ISCA'19 peer review fraud case. IEEE/ACM are having some major issues these days.
though it is more about the ACM/IEEE side of things rather than what was going on in Florida.
Many researchers seemed to know there was weird stuff going on with peer-review at ISCA, but if you asked the researchers they'd just shrug and more or less say something to the effect of "don't hate the player, hate the game"
also, at ISCA'19, over half the papers were PC papers, meaning they were papers where one of the authors was on the committee that picked which papers get in. It's probably why the highers ups have been so reluctant to change the culture at the conference because it would so negatively effect all the higher-ups' publication counts
ISCA is a particularly horrible "top" conference. We've been trying to reproduce some papers with questionable methodology from ISCA'20 (including using "1 cycle access L1 cache" in simulations, something that's not really possible on modern CPUs).
Of 5 paper groups contacted, 4 have not responded despite repeated requests, even when VPs of research at the university contacted.
One group eventually replied, said that they were "too busy" to release their simulator changes, and then also saying they weren't going to because they were worried about it being classified as a munitions export.
the IEEE probably won't do anything. We've been trying for 2 years to even get an e-mail reply from them on the issue, let alone say anything useful. See the whole story here:
https://pbzcnepu.net/isca/timeline.html
https://pbzcnepu.net/ieee/index.html