4 ms·
What about Springer or Nature publishing? Unfortunately, the real evil is rooted in a system that measures excellence based on publishing records and not scient
by ristretto 15y ago
What about Springer or Nature publishing? Unfortunately, the real evil is rooted in a system that measures excellence based on publishing records and not scientific impact. Until there's a replacement for that, life scientists will keep sheepishly bowing to the publishers. That replacement could be an idea for a startup.
- shadowfox 15y ago> Unfortunately, the real evil is rooted in a system that measures excellence based on publishing records and not scientific impact Can you clarify this a bit? How do you get to have impact without first publishing it somewhere (at least mildly reputable) and having other people actually read it/review it/run with it?
- ristretto 15y agoMy ideal system would be a global open system where scientists would publish their results, not papers. Other scientists would be able to review, confirm and reuse your results transparently and third parties would be able to assess your position from your record and the feedback that you get from fellow scientists. That could involve many more signals rather than just the (journal+number of citations) that everyone uses now.