> Nobody, obviously. You cannot reproduce a result that hasn’t been published, .. The problem is not the publication of new discoveries, it’s the lack of incentives to confirm them once they’ve been published.

Your comment concerns post-publication peer-replication, yes?

If so, it's a different topic. The linked-to essay specifically proposes:

""Instead of sending out a manuscript to anonymous referees to read and review, preprints should be sent to other labs to actually replicate the findings. Once the key findings are replicated, the manuscript would be accepted and published.""

That's pre-publication peer-replication, and my comment was only meant to be interpreted in that light.