5 ms·

Delivering Equitable Access to America’s Research

59 points by leephillips 4y ago

arcanus 4y ago
This new policy will require, by 2026, all federally-funded research results to be freely available to the American public. A huge portion of scientific research is federally funded, and this will likely drive all research to open access. Overall, this is a great result for researchers, a great act for the USA, and a benefit for all of humanity. I hope other nations quickly follow.
- digdugdirk 4y ago
  I didn't notice anything about releasing data/code/failed results in the press release. Does anyone know if this will include that aspect of research? That would be a huge stipulation on researchers, but could drastically improve the misaligned incentives in the academic community.
  - arcanus 4y ago
    I agree, this is only obliquely referenced, "making data published in peer-reviewed research articles immediately available upon publication and other research data available within a reasonable timeframe." Appears the paper's key data will be available immediately.
orangepurple 4y ago
Just create a federally funded sci-hub similar to NCBI PubMed already
Proven 4y ago
boppo1 4y ago
Could there be any unintended consequences here?
paulsmith 4y ago
I was interested if there were any details or guidance on the implementation. From what I can gather from the memo: they are leaving it up to federal scientific orgs and researchers to come up with a publishing solution (both for data and research paper content), but are asking for some metadata requirements that include persistent unique IDs (for integrity purposes) and are encouraging orgs to coordinate on solutions to reduce duplication of effort.
leeroyjenkins11 4y ago
I love how everything needs to be through equity now. You can't just say we want to provide open access to publicly funded studies. It has to be about minorities
- tchaffee 4y ago
  What's your problem with folks calling out that society has traditionally and continues to discriminate using "factors including race, age, disability status, geography, economic background, and gender". What about this truth bothers you so much? Also note the press release did not mention "minorities". It was much broader than that to include things like "economic background", and you decided to cherry pick one of those factors. Why? You don't think that poor white people have inequities around access to public research results they cannot afford to pay for?
  - tomp 4y ago
    > folks calling out that society has traditionally and continues to discriminate using "factors including race, age, disability status, geography, economic background, and gender". Because it’s used to obfuscate the singular most important factor: wealth. Divide and conquer.
    - tchaffee 4y ago
      > Because it’s used to obfuscate the singular most important factor: wealth. Divide and conquer. Did you know you can identify as disabled while still feeling solidarity with other groups who are discriminated against? It doesn't feel like divide and conquer to me. Does the recent student loan forgiveness of up to $20,000 jive with your claim that we are dealing with someone who is trying to use divide and conquer to avoid dealing with wealth inequities? And making sure a valuable resource is now free that used to cost money is directly addressing one aspect of the wealth factor, isn't it? Equal access to a valuable resource for everyone in the world divides people in what way? Also note that wealth does not eliminate a physical disability. Nor does it erase the real discrimination that still happens. Are we allowed to talk about that discrimination and ask for more equity if it's our life experience? Or is that divide and conquer?
xor99 4y ago
Someone should build a peer-to-peer rating and review server for the research outputs. Sci-hub was great in its time but there's a need for something better now. Also, will the act cover historical gov funded research?
trasz 4y ago
Does it apply only to research within US, or also outside but funded by US?
hoppyhoppy2 4y ago
Related discussion 3 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32596182 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32596182

59 points by leephillips 4y ago

This new policy will require, by 2026, all federally-funded research results to be freely available to the American public. A huge portion of scientific research is federally funded, and this will likely drive all research to open access. Overall, this is a great result for researchers, a great act for the USA, and a benefit for all of humanity. I hope other nations quickly follow.

digdugdirk 4y ago
I didn't notice anything about releasing data/code/failed results in the press release. Does anyone know if this will include that aspect of research? That would be a huge stipulation on researchers, but could drastically improve the misaligned incentives in the academic community.
- arcanus 4y ago
  I agree, this is only obliquely referenced, "making data published in peer-reviewed research articles immediately available upon publication and other research data available within a reasonable timeframe." Appears the paper's key data will be available immediately.

orangepurple 4y ago

Just create a federally funded sci-hub similar to NCBI PubMed already

Proven 4y ago

boppo1 4y ago

Could there be any unintended consequences here?

paulsmith 4y ago

I was interested if there were any details or guidance on the implementation. From what I can gather from the memo: they are leaving it up to federal scientific orgs and researchers to come up with a publishing solution (both for data and research paper content), but are asking for some metadata requirements that include persistent unique IDs (for integrity purposes) and are encouraging orgs to coordinate on solutions to reduce duplication of effort.

leeroyjenkins11 4y ago

I love how everything needs to be through equity now. You can't just say we want to provide open access to publicly funded studies. It has to be about minorities

tchaffee 4y ago
What's your problem with folks calling out that society has traditionally and continues to discriminate using "factors including race, age, disability status, geography, economic background, and gender". What about this truth bothers you so much? Also note the press release did not mention "minorities". It was much broader than that to include things like "economic background", and you decided to cherry pick one of those factors. Why? You don't think that poor white people have inequities around access to public research results they cannot afford to pay for?
- tomp 4y ago
  > folks calling out that society has traditionally and continues to discriminate using "factors including race, age, disability status, geography, economic background, and gender". Because it’s used to obfuscate the singular most important factor: wealth. Divide and conquer.
  - tchaffee 4y ago
    > Because it’s used to obfuscate the singular most important factor: wealth. Divide and conquer. Did you know you can identify as disabled while still feeling solidarity with other groups who are discriminated against? It doesn't feel like divide and conquer to me. Does the recent student loan forgiveness of up to $20,000 jive with your claim that we are dealing with someone who is trying to use divide and conquer to avoid dealing with wealth inequities? And making sure a valuable resource is now free that used to cost money is directly addressing one aspect of the wealth factor, isn't it? Equal access to a valuable resource for everyone in the world divides people in what way? Also note that wealth does not eliminate a physical disability. Nor does it erase the real discrimination that still happens. Are we allowed to talk about that discrimination and ask for more equity if it's our life experience? Or is that divide and conquer?

xor99 4y ago

Someone should build a peer-to-peer rating and review server for the research outputs. Sci-hub was great in its time but there's a need for something better now. Also, will the act cover historical gov funded research?

trasz 4y ago

Does it apply only to research within US, or also outside but funded by US?

hoppyhoppy2 4y ago

Related discussion 3 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32596182 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32596182