Walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees • Hacker News Board

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

#251

Post by Oranguru » Tue, May 09, 2023, 2:19 AM UTC

akjssdk wrote: post #187

baidifnaoxi wrote: post #146

Honestly if even $1 of public money goes toward research, the work, data, journal, etc should all be public domain. End of story. That should be a basic requirement of taking public funds.

The national Dutch funding agency that effectively funds all research in the Netherlands requires this. Buy considers it sufficient for you to publish in a closed journal and then deposit a copy in an open repository. The French also have a similar system I believe.

This is also a requirement for the research conducted under a project funded by the european comission.

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

#252

Post by wdpt » Tue, May 09, 2023, 11:52 AM UTC

Sadly, this is not novel where the problem and researcher community stand is well known (or, should be). See "the cost of knowledge" release in 2012 by Timothy Gowers. http://thecostofknowledge.com/

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

#253

Post by Timwi » Wed, May 10, 2023, 9:27 AM UTC

freeone3000 wrote: post #203

lores wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peer review absolutely add costs. Finding a reviewer who's qualified, free and willing takes time and effort, and that's increasing by the day. Frankly, I think peer review is doomed. There's now a flood of AI-generated papers that journals need to weed out, and even 99% success is not good enough for peer-reviewers' workload and continued respect. On top of that, natural demographics, the cuts to university funding…

It might be easier to find reviewers if they were compensated for their time instead of volunteers for a for-profit publisher.

As soon as you pay reviewers, you now have to deal with people pretending to be academics and pretending to review a paper just to earn money, which adds additional cost. Not to mention that money can introduce biases even if the reviewer is genuine.

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

#254

Post by Fordec » Thu, May 11, 2023, 6:00 AM UTC

mjklin wrote: post #149

Fordec wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't mistake self-congratulatory with show-y about academia. Only the home crowd know academics names, politics at least has the public eye on them.

I feel like this depends on the field. Newer / “hotter” fields (e.g. evo psych) tend to be dominated by rockstars while traditional / staid fields (e.g. linear algebra) have mostly solid and competent practitioners.

I haven't even heard of evo psych lol, never mind these "rockstars".