Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 254 posts

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#61

Post by goosedragons »

jltsiren wrote: post #22
gradstudent wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing elsevier manages is their website. The review process is managed by academics who also work for free. Typesetting is done by authors. Paper printing is basically extinct.

Typesetting is done by authors (in some fields) and then completely redone by Elsevier staff. The value they add is questionable at best, but they certainly spend a lot of effort making the paper conform to their standards.

Which the author then has to go back and fix because they don't understand what they're typesetting. Some journals provide the LaTeX template too so they don't even do THAT step.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#62

Post by auggierose »

rwalle wrote: post #32
auggierose wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A half-decent review is not a proper review. Just the fact you are saying it like that is basically accepting that nobody is doing proper reviews.

You'll be surprised how many scientific papers published in reputable journals are not "properly reviewed". In many cases there simply isn't enough time or knowledge to go through every detail of a paper. One example -- if a paper says go to a github repository to look at our source code, guess how many people actually review the code as part of the peer review process? Very few. There could be serious bugs in the co…

After reading my previous comments, why would you think that surprises me? I know for a fact that academics of the highest reputation do very poor reviewing. The cost of a low-quality review is basically zero for the reviewer, while the cost of a high-quality review is high. The consequences of this are not surprising.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#63

Post by redox99 »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #34

Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing? First off, if the only publisher you have a problem with is Elsevier, you have already shown your hand. A half dozen other publishers are more expensive, but you can only name Elsevier. That means you're just repeating a meme that started on forums like this one. So take a moment and ask yourself why any of these publisher…

> Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing?

It's pretty simple. Most of us here are used to just downloading "preprints" pdfs from arxiv for basically any CS/AI paper. If all papers were available on arxiv or an equivalent website for free and without forms, probably nobody here would care or complain about Elsevier et. al.

Want to in addition to publishing on arxiv, publish on Nature? Sure go ahead. Want to only read papers after they've been peer reviewed on Nature. Go ahead.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#64

Post by mjklin »

apples_oranges wrote: post #8

By watching the vintage TV show Miami Vice I learned that many people make a living out of selling an image (one of the cornerstones of Sonny Crockett's policing philosophy). TED comes to mind. Or WEF in Davos. They are all basically just marketing operations. (TED sells the hip/green young futurists and WEF plays the conspiracy angle.) Same with this science stuff here. Of course the professional scientists love the…

It has been well said that academia is “show business for ugly people”.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#65

Post by dguest »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #59
throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #34

Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing? First off, if the only publisher you have a problem with is Elsevier, you have already shown your hand. A half dozen other publishers are more expensive, but you can only name Elsevier. That means you're just repeating a meme that started on forums like this one. So take a moment and ask yourself why any of these publisher…

You're saying academic prestige is a Veblen good, like a handbag? Are you sure?

The comparison between publications and handbags is cute... but yes, it falls apart for exactly the reason you mention. A prestigious journal would still be prestigious if they made publication free.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#66

Post by cma »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #34

Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing? First off, if the only publisher you have a problem with is Elsevier, you have already shown your hand. A half dozen other publishers are more expensive, but you can only name Elsevier. That means you're just repeating a meme that started on forums like this one. So take a moment and ask yourself why any of these publisher…

> Louis Vouitton sells a handbag for $2k. Is it worth $2k? You could say no, that any other bag would be just as useful. But value isn't utility alone. People find that the bag is worth the price because of the prestige that the brand imbues the owner with.

Change the analogy so that the customers design and mostly manufacture the bag.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#67

Post by krisoft »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #34

Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing? First off, if the only publisher you have a problem with is Elsevier, you have already shown your hand. A half dozen other publishers are more expensive, but you can only name Elsevier. That means you're just repeating a meme that started on forums like this one. So take a moment and ask yourself why any of these publisher…

> Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing?

Because people can have opinions on industries they don’t work in?

I don’t work in hospitality, and I have never cooked for a living. I can still confidently tell you when my food is burnt. A chef then can crawl out of the kitchen and explain the complicated process which resulted in me getting burnt food and I won’t care a bit.

My tax money paid a researcher to study long years, then my tax money paid for the equipment the researcher used to research and my tax money paid for the researcher’s time too. And then the researcher writes up what they found and pays a third party also from my tax money and that third party does everything in their power to hide the paper away from me. That is burnt food. I don’t have to work in the industry to recognise it.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#68

Post by a_bonobo »

noisy_boy wrote: post #50
a_bonobo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah but you see, it takes a few years before a new journal even has an impact factor, the sole number with which it is evaluated. To have a high impact factor means that other journals have cited your journal for years in high numbers. It's a chicken & egg problem - you need a good decade for a journal to be come influential/high IF, but for that to happen you need people to submit their papers to your journal. And th…

I guess it is the equivalent of the Facebook problem. You are on Facebook because all your family is and no one leaves for a new platform because no one else is using that. Except it is worse here and instead of just missing out on updates/photos, it directly affects your livelihood.

Exactly!!! And there's very little 'regular' scientists can do about this. It's a system upheld by senior academics' conceptions, funding agencies, and university management staff.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#69

Post by ghaff »

refurb wrote: post #45
throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #34

Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing? First off, if the only publisher you have a problem with is Elsevier, you have already shown your hand. A half dozen other publishers are more expensive, but you can only name Elsevier. That means you're just repeating a meme that started on forums like this one. So take a moment and ask yourself why any of these publisher…

You’ve pretty much nailed it. I anticipate you’ll be downvoted for it. Academic research (one of the big complainers about the cost) could fix this easily - stop rewarding scientists for publishing in those journals! Pick other, less expensive, prestigious enough journals, and academics will publish in those. But the system can’t be broken easily. The prestige of many journals has been developed over decades or in so…

Fundamentally, changing the academic journal system is "just" about fundamentally changing how academics are recognized, rewarded, and promoted to something that no one really has a blueprint for. (And publish everything and the cream will somehow rise to the top isn't it.)

I also suspect that a lot of people complaining the loudest would also be unhappy if their recognition, reward, and promotion system was changed to something even more arbitrary and subjective than it already is.

Re: Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

#70

Post by Dma54rhs »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #59
throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #34

Why do so many commenters on HN always sound so confident, yet none of them work in publishing? First off, if the only publisher you have a problem with is Elsevier, you have already shown your hand. A half dozen other publishers are more expensive, but you can only name Elsevier. That means you're just repeating a meme that started on forums like this one. So take a moment and ask yourself why any of these publisher…

You're saying academic prestige is a Veblen good, like a handbag? Are you sure?

In academic circles absolutely.
Post reply on HN