4 ms·
This isn’t even a good summary The whole crux of the argument is that this is research that is federally funded Whether or not a cartel is “rational” complete
by AndrewKemendo 3y ago
This isn’t even a good summary
The whole crux of the argument is that this is research that is federally funded
Whether or not a cartel is “rational” completely misses the point. It’s publicly funded research so it should be public data. Full stop no caveats or attempts to maintain the current system.
- zeroCalories 3y agoThere's no "full stop", that's entirely a negotiated between the researches and the state, as is happening here. You can strong arm researchers into accepting worse terms, but that just means you'll get less research done, unless funding is increased.
- AndrewKemendo 3y agoAt what point do researchers benefit from the cartel? Never. Reviewers and paper judges don’t get paid. Arxiv and OR have done more for researchers than the scientific publishing cartel ever has The field of ML moves as quickly as it does because doing closed access ML separates you from the community
- shkkmo 3y ago> You can strong arm researchers into accepting worse terms, but that just means you'll get less research done, unless funding is increased. Many of the researchers are absolutely fine with this rule. It's only the top ASA leadership and the rent extracting journals that have a problem with no longer facilitating journal's rent extraction from publicly funded research.
- lupusreal 3y agoNever negotiate with a parasite. Rip it off and stomp on it.
- s1artibartfast 3y agoI agree with Pol Pot here, eradicate the scientists!
- lupusreal 3y agoTry to pay attention, we're talking about commercial journals. Scientists don't need them except insofar as their bosses expect them to publish in them. The parasitic nature of these journals is evident from the fact that some disciplines have successfully moved away from them.
- s1artibartfast 3y agoThey are one and the same
- lupusreal 3y agoIn fact they are not.
- JoeJonathan 3y agoEveryone is just kind of assuming that sociological research is "federally funded," but what do we mean by that? Surely, not all research is federally funded. I work in an adjacent field with a similar grant structure, and "funding" is a combination of faculty salary and grants, which typically come from both federal organizations and foundations like Mellon, ACLS, etc. While I'm all for open access (so long as authors don't need to pay to publish, which is often the case with open access journals), it would be a mistake to think research is publicly funded in the US to the same extent that it is in Europe or Latin America.
- pessimizer 3y ago> "funding" is a combination of faculty salary and grants, which typically come from both federal organizations and foundations like Mellon, ACLS, etc. This can also be a form of money laundering, though. You can easily end up completely government funded, but only through indirect means.
- bumby 3y agoThe memorandum calls for this to apply to unclassified research funded "wholly or in part" by federal funds. So, even a partial contribution by any of those mechanisms you identified may mark it for open access, although individual agencies are tasked with developing their own implementation policies. What I'm afraid of occurring is over-leveraging classification of research as a means around this, if for no other reason than it's easier to implement/publish.