4 ms·

- Government uses tax payer money to fund a bunch of research (internal and at universities) - Some publisher paywalls the research - Taxpayers pay publisher

- Government uses tax payer money to fund a bunch of research (internal and at universities) - Some publisher paywalls the research - Taxpayers pay publisher to unpaywall the research Really dumb system. All research should be open, the CS field is doing this well. All sciences should follow.

tmaly 2y ago
all taxpayer funded research should be open sourced.
- epistasis 2y ago
  It is, both at the USDA [0] and those who receive grants from NIH and NCI. All this action does is make researchers at USDA much less productive by removing their access to research that others have published behind paywalls. However, Elsevier, the most vampiric of the paywallers, was deemed suitable-to-be-paid by DOGE. [0] https://www.nal.usda.gov/services/public-access https://www.nal.usda.gov/services/public-access
epistasis 2y ago
This DOGE action makes that system far far worse: > Most of the affected publishers are university or nonprofit scientific society presses, including Cambridge University Press; Oxford University Press; the American Phytopathological Society; the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which publishes the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences; and AAAS, which publishes Science. (Science’s News section is editorially independent.) Several of the journals whose subscriptions were canceled rank in the top quartile for impact factor in their subfield—for example, the Royal Society of Chemistry’s Food & Function and Oxford’s Journal of Integrated Pest Management. > The National Agricultural Library cuts didn’t include journals at Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley. Together those publishers accounted for more than half of the library’s journal subscriptions before the cuts, according to an analysis by Science. Studies of journal subscription fees indicate that on average, scientific society publishers charge less than such for-profit companies. Only the most greedy pay-walled publishers are getting paid now. And on top of it all the current researchers are missing out on a lot of research.

tmaly 2y ago

all taxpayer funded research should be open sourced.

epistasis 2y ago
It is, both at the USDA [0] and those who receive grants from NIH and NCI. All this action does is make researchers at USDA much less productive by removing their access to research that others have published behind paywalls. However, Elsevier, the most vampiric of the paywallers, was deemed suitable-to-be-paid by DOGE. [0] https://www.nal.usda.gov/services/public-access https://www.nal.usda.gov/services/public-access

epistasis 2y ago

This DOGE action makes that system far far worse: > Most of the affected publishers are university or nonprofit scientific society presses, including Cambridge University Press; Oxford University Press; the American Phytopathological Society; the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which publishes the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences; and AAAS, which publishes Science. (Science’s News section is editorially independent.) Several of the journals whose subscriptions were canceled rank in the top quartile for impact factor in their subfield—for example, the Royal Society of Chemistry’s Food & Function and Oxford’s Journal of Integrated Pest Management. > The National Agricultural Library cuts didn’t include journals at Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley. Together those publishers accounted for more than half of the library’s journal subscriptions before the cuts, according to an analysis by Science. Studies of journal subscription fees indicate that on average, scientific society publishers charge less than such for-profit companies. Only the most greedy pay-walled publishers are getting paid now. And on top of it all the current researchers are missing out on a lot of research.