5 ms·

I have so much respect for the editors who were willing to make this jump. I've wondered if there is some cognitive dissonance between the strong feelings I ha

I have so much respect for the editors who were willing to make this jump. I've wondered if there is some cognitive dissonance between the strong feelings I have that scientific journals should be open access and my willingness to buy and use closed source software (even though I run an open source software foundation). But I don't think so. Fundamentally, I think authors have the right to determine how their work is used. If they want it to be used and available as widely as possible, they should publish it under an open source license and in an open source journal. But when for-profit companies like Elsevier control the journals in which publication is necessary for getting tenure, they are restricting information flow and harming science with no countervailing benefits. Furthermore, many journal articles are supported by government grants, and it's just appalling to me not to have access to the results of research that I am paying for. (If not for https://sci-hub.tw/ https://sci-hub.tw/ obviously.) I'm optimistic that the author-pays model of funding copy editing will work out and that for-profit journals will be seen in another couple decades as akin to leeching and phrenology.

apathy 8y ago
Except that leeching has benefits
- dankohn1 8y ago
  It does! I wondered if someone would point that out. (Though blood letting does not). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodletting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodletting
  - tonyg 8y ago
    Blood-letting also has benefits in some cases! For example, venesection is a standard treatment for haemochromatosis: http://haemochromatosis.org.uk/haemochromatosis/treatment/ http://haemochromatosis.org.uk/haemochromatosis/treatment/
- sigi45 8y ago
  But he referred to the notion of how it was widley used in old times and didn't do anything.
baldfat 8y ago
> Fundamentally, I think authors have the right to determine how their work is used. Fundamentally, I think TAX PAYERS have a right to access all funded research!
- geezerjay 8y ago
  That's very true, but in practice these corporations argue that that particular paper is their copyright, not the research. Thus, just because the general public need to pay to access a particular document, that doesn't mean they are barred from the research.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    Which is fine. Just that the public should demand that all research using public money is done openly, so all data and papers are accessible to the public in perpetuity. Researchers are welcome to refuse to accept that deal, just so long as they don't take any public money. Simples.
    - rusticpenn 8y ago
      Researchers dont get any money for writing papers in those journals, Infact, researchers have to pay to get their paper published in most of these journals.
      - wlesieutre 8y ago
        Pay out of their research budget with your tax dollars
        krull10 8y ago
        Not all researchers have thousands of dollars available in grants to cover the types of publishing fees that have become common as the burden of payment shifts from readers to researchers. Graduate students, postdocs or even professors may end up having to pay out of their own pocket to get a publication in a high-profile journal that is necessary to advance their career.
dmos62 8y ago
> Fundamentally, I think authors have the right to determine how their work is used. In my view, to think that an individual is the sole author of his intellectual product is a bit egotistic, which is sort of normal given a prevailing culture of "you are what you make". In my opinion, my intellectual product is a product of everyone and everything that's influenced me. An important part of that influence was someone sharing.

apathy 8y ago

Except that leeching has benefits

dankohn1 8y ago
It does! I wondered if someone would point that out. (Though blood letting does not). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodletting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodletting
- tonyg 8y ago
  Blood-letting also has benefits in some cases! For example, venesection is a standard treatment for haemochromatosis: http://haemochromatosis.org.uk/haemochromatosis/treatment/ http://haemochromatosis.org.uk/haemochromatosis/treatment/
sigi45 8y ago
But he referred to the notion of how it was widley used in old times and didn't do anything.

baldfat 8y ago

> Fundamentally, I think authors have the right to determine how their work is used. Fundamentally, I think TAX PAYERS have a right to access all funded research!

geezerjay 8y ago
That's very true, but in practice these corporations argue that that particular paper is their copyright, not the research. Thus, just because the general public need to pay to access a particular document, that doesn't mean they are barred from the research.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Which is fine. Just that the public should demand that all research using public money is done openly, so all data and papers are accessible to the public in perpetuity. Researchers are welcome to refuse to accept that deal, just so long as they don't take any public money. Simples.
  - rusticpenn 8y ago
    Researchers dont get any money for writing papers in those journals, Infact, researchers have to pay to get their paper published in most of these journals.
    - wlesieutre 8y ago
      Pay out of their research budget with your tax dollars
      - krull10 8y ago
        Not all researchers have thousands of dollars available in grants to cover the types of publishing fees that have become common as the burden of payment shifts from readers to researchers. Graduate students, postdocs or even professors may end up having to pay out of their own pocket to get a publication in a high-profile journal that is necessary to advance their career.

dmos62 8y ago

> Fundamentally, I think authors have the right to determine how their work is used. In my view, to think that an individual is the sole author of his intellectual product is a bit egotistic, which is sort of normal given a prevailing culture of "you are what you make". In my opinion, my intellectual product is a product of everyone and everything that's influenced me. An important part of that influence was someone sharing.