3 ms·
Thats not a valid analogy because reviewers and authors already work for free for closed-access journals. And open-access journals are not of lower quality, jus
by buboard 7y ago
Thats not a valid analogy because reviewers and authors already work for free for closed-access journals. And open-access journals are not of lower quality, just not as popular. The closest analogy would be the App Store which forces programmers to pay an extortionate tax to have their code 'recognized'.
- geofft 7y agoIf I'm understanding you right, I think you're saying that open access is even more tenable than open source, which I agree with :) But the secret of open source is that it was the same people (or at least the same job roles) who were previously writing proprietary software. Companies just decided that it made more sense to have them collectively, collaboratively work in public on infrastructure software than to pay a single vendor for closed-source code. It's not that hobbyists are implementing core OS scheduling primitives like cgroups, it's that the professional engineers doing that are now employed directly by end users like Facebook or Google instead of by vendors like SCO or Sun.