4 ms·

Awesome. I do think all publicly funded research papers should be available. Research done by private companies using their own funds however shouldn't be. May

by Keverw 9y ago

Awesome. I do think all publicly funded research papers should be available. Research done by private companies using their own funds however shouldn't be. Maybe if America had open access, things would of turned out a lot better for Aaron Swartz :(

coldtea 9y ago
>Research done by private companies using their own funds however shouldn't be. Well, "private" and "public" is a fuzzy distinction. Most of the mega-private companies get so much public money (in the form of subsidies) or avoid paying so much money (in the form of special tax deals and exception laws they lobby and pay under the table for) that end up costing more to a state than lots of its own operations. When they tanked after decades of gluttony and playing it fast and loose with huge profits (which they didn't share of course), the "private" financial firms got a 1 trillion government bailout (and similar treatment in Europe and elsewhere), whereas no small private business will ever see a dime in such fashion.
- tnecniv 9y ago
  It's also fuzzy because money doesn't just come from one place. I know grad students who were paid off NSF grants but worked on projects also funded by private companies.
nbanks 9y ago
The increase in GDP should make it profitable for government to fund all journals. The cost is relatively small as compared to the benefit to all citizens, allowing them to understand new technologies, business and social structures. Like education, this seems like a way to spend public funds with a high return on investment. Obviously this isn't the only reason governments should spend money--veterans and health care for retirees shouldn't be ignored--but it's nice when spending grows the economy.
- a3_nm 9y ago
  > The cost is relatively small as compared to the benefit to all citizens The cost is in fact small just compared to the subscription fees. I don't have the statistics for how much countries pay editors in subscription fees (because in fact these deals are often negociated in private and the terms are secret), but I think it is highly likely that this money is several times higher than what it would cost to run everything on private money.
bostik 9y ago
When I did my master's, I explicitly chose 2-clause BSD as the license for all the code I had produced as part of the thesis. My thesis project was done with, and paid for, by the university I attended. Since my work was being funded with public money, I felt it only fair to release everything with a liberal license. The review board expressly noted two things that were out of the norm with my thesis. One: I chose to include source code with my thesis. Every copy came with a CD-ROM. (I even made sure to upload the same archive to the digital library so access to print copies was not required.) And two: the review board made a point of mentioning that I released the sources for my thesis project with a very liberal license. What I had considered only fair, the board considered out of the ordinary. Footnote - I didn't include just the sources. I included the entire .svn/ hierarchy to provide complete editing history. Footnote 2 - I picked up git in 2007. Thesis was done in 2006.
- lsh 9y ago
  Really well done. A decade later it's still a struggle to get some basic things negotiated and signed off when code is part of a submission, like an open license, a specific revision to be pinned to the paper if under version control, or simply getting the code into version control if not. This requires training up and down the line and it's helpful if authors push for these basic things because if a formal process isn't in place to handle exotic content like code, then it may get dropped from the final submission because it's simply too much of an effort for everybody.
- ams6110 9y ago
  Interesting. I thought that kind of stuff (code) would be the intellectual property if the University and subject to their licensing terms.
- type0 9y ago
  I think that the history should be mandatory also for the comments (i.e. from your adviser or reviewer). That could apply for other scientific disciplines as well and give a very good indication on the quality of the process that the thesis went trough, sadly academics are the worst people to agree on anything.

by Keverw 9y ago

coldtea 9y ago

>Research done by private companies using their own funds however shouldn't be. Well, "private" and "public" is a fuzzy distinction. Most of the mega-private companies get so much public money (in the form of subsidies) or avoid paying so much money (in the form of special tax deals and exception laws they lobby and pay under the table for) that end up costing more to a state than lots of its own operations. When they tanked after decades of gluttony and playing it fast and loose with huge profits (which they didn't share of course), the "private" financial firms got a 1 trillion government bailout (and similar treatment in Europe and elsewhere), whereas no small private business will ever see a dime in such fashion.

tnecniv 9y ago
It's also fuzzy because money doesn't just come from one place. I know grad students who were paid off NSF grants but worked on projects also funded by private companies.

nbanks 9y ago

The increase in GDP should make it profitable for government to fund all journals. The cost is relatively small as compared to the benefit to all citizens, allowing them to understand new technologies, business and social structures. Like education, this seems like a way to spend public funds with a high return on investment. Obviously this isn't the only reason governments should spend money--veterans and health care for retirees shouldn't be ignored--but it's nice when spending grows the economy.

a3_nm 9y ago
> The cost is relatively small as compared to the benefit to all citizens The cost is in fact small just compared to the subscription fees. I don't have the statistics for how much countries pay editors in subscription fees (because in fact these deals are often negociated in private and the terms are secret), but I think it is highly likely that this money is several times higher than what it would cost to run everything on private money.

bostik 9y ago

When I did my master's, I explicitly chose 2-clause BSD as the license for all the code I had produced as part of the thesis. My thesis project was done with, and paid for, by the university I attended. Since my work was being funded with public money, I felt it only fair to release everything with a liberal license. The review board expressly noted two things that were out of the norm with my thesis. One: I chose to include source code with my thesis. Every copy came with a CD-ROM. (I even made sure to upload the same archive to the digital library so access to print copies was not required.) And two: the review board made a point of mentioning that I released the sources for my thesis project with a very liberal license. What I had considered only fair, the board considered out of the ordinary. Footnote - I didn't include just the sources. I included the entire .svn/ hierarchy to provide complete editing history. Footnote 2 - I picked up git in 2007. Thesis was done in 2006.

lsh 9y ago
Really well done. A decade later it's still a struggle to get some basic things negotiated and signed off when code is part of a submission, like an open license, a specific revision to be pinned to the paper if under version control, or simply getting the code into version control if not. This requires training up and down the line and it's helpful if authors push for these basic things because if a formal process isn't in place to handle exotic content like code, then it may get dropped from the final submission because it's simply too much of an effort for everybody.
ams6110 9y ago
Interesting. I thought that kind of stuff (code) would be the intellectual property if the University and subject to their licensing terms.
type0 9y ago
I think that the history should be mandatory also for the comments (i.e. from your adviser or reviewer). That could apply for other scientific disciplines as well and give a very good indication on the quality of the process that the thesis went trough, sadly academics are the worst people to agree on anything.