3 ms·

Science brings humanity forward, your Netflix subscription does not. Simple as that. The former should not be the subject of economic rent.

• SkyBelow 1y ago
  Calling this economic rent, if anything, underplays the issue. The economics in play appear worse than what rent normally covers. The science is funded by other sources, often from the groups which want access, the scientists are not paid and many have to pay to publish. Reviewers are rarely if ever paid. Public ability to peruse science, something that is already limited by the difficulty of understanding the papers, is made far worse by the price tag. The value provided seems to mainly be some name recognition that has fed a publish or perish model that is arguably detrimental to science research at scale. All considered, calling it economic rent appears too charitable an interpretation.
• kleiba 1y ago
  It does not matter if it should or shouldn't. Since someone else brought up insulin before, you could also argue that all medication should be free - alas it isn't. It is totally fine to object the status quo of certain aspects of life or society. But in a democracy, the right way to go about changing them is not to just simply take what you can.
  • mistercheph 1y ago
    In a democracy that has been captured by massive commercial interests? Do you see any politicians ranting against the copyright system? Have a guess why? They wield power unapologetically, Disney execs would actually kill people if they had to to get copyright terms extended, using dark libraries is a sensible response to the current state of affairs.