Researchers are curating for the editors, and are often not even paid for it. So the value that the editors bring is often low at best.

That implies that papers all have roughly the same value, which is certainly not true.

Peer review is fundamental to scientific endeavor but... in ML fields, reviewers almost never check the code and Python package management is hardly reproducible. So clearly we are not there, Python or not.

I concur. Hypothesis saved me many times. It also helped me prove the existence of bugs in third party code, since I was able to generate examples showing that a specific function was not respecting certain properties. Without that I would have spent a lot of time trying to manually find an example, let alone the simplest possible example.