4 ms·
It's probably worth pointing out that open access, while important, isn't really relevant to this discussion as publishers like Nature already embrace open acce
by bengillies 13y ago
It's probably worth pointing out that open access, while important, isn't really relevant to this discussion as publishers like Nature already embrace open access.
(disclaimer, I work for Digital Science, which is owned by the company that owns Nature)
- dekhn 13y agoDrop the paywall. Then we can talk about Nature and open access.
- ihnorton 13y agoIt's probably worth pointing out that open access, while important, isn't really relevant to this discussion as publishers like Nature already embrace open access. Uh, I just tried accessing a random article in Nature and hit the $32/article paywall. So no, don't think so.
- eli 13y agoI think Science articles are free one year after they're published.
- rmk2 13y agoJust in case anybody wants to read a bit more about this: This is Green Open Access, which usually means that the publication is blocked for a while, but usually doesn't cost the author (or their institution) anything extra. The other option is Gold Open Access, which, depending on journal, can get rather pricey, but makes the article openly available immediately. → https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access#Implementation_practices https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access#Implementation_pra...
- mturmon 13y agoYes. Science and Nature are different in this regard. Science also has much lower subscription fees, probably because it's run by a nonprofit, where Nature is for-profit.