Live data from Hacker News

ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

acm.org

11–20 of 63 posts

Re: ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

#11
post #8

USENIX and their conferences were the absolute best to publish with. You as a researcher focus on submitting papers and/or being part of the PC. They help organize the whole conference instead of depending on an army of volunteers (you won't see "general chairs" and "local chairs" unlike with ACM). And all papers were open access without even needing a login: you literally just click the PDF from the conference websi…

[deleted]

Re: ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

#12
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has always worked like that.

This is just shifting the cost from the readers to the writers. It doesn't make it any better as the prices are completely out of touch with reality. Note that this is not the cost for registering at a conference; that is separate. This is just the publishing fee for each paper.

[deleted]

Re: ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

#14
post #6

I've greatly appreciated the ACM's movements toward open access, but I have to ask: What's the license? The Berlin Declaration that defined Open Access https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration defines it as follows: > 1. Open access contributions must satisfy two conditions:The author(s) and right holder(s) of such contributions grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, right of access to, and a licen…

New articles are Creative Commons (CC-BY or CC-BY-NC-ND).

Re: ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

#15
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has always worked like that.

This is just shifting the cost from the readers to the writers. It doesn't make it any better as the prices are completely out of touch with reality. Note that this is not the cost for registering at a conference; that is separate. This is just the publishing fee for each paper.

It's not really shifting the cost from readers to writers, since these fee existed beforehand though. They just went from double-dipping to single dipping.

Re: ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

#17
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just shifting the cost from the readers to the writers. It doesn't make it any better as the prices are completely out of touch with reality. Note that this is not the cost for registering at a conference; that is separate. This is just the publishing fee for each paper.

It's not really shifting the cost from readers to writers, since these fee existed beforehand though. They just went from double-dipping to single dipping.

The open access pricing is different and higher than the old closed access pricing. That is the switch in all open access publishing. In any case, both the old prices and new ones are absurdly high.

Re: ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

#18
post #7

With publishing prices ranging from $700 to $1800. Some real art of the deal stuff here.

It has always worked like that.

ACM went hybrid access (optional APC for Gold open access) in 2013. Before that, there were no APCs. As of 2026 authors will pay APC unless their institution pays (by subscribing, or directly). If you are in a developed country and not affiliated with a subscriber institution, there is no longer a free-to-publish option.

Re: ACM Transitions to Full Open Access

#19
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really shifting the cost from readers to writers, since these fee existed beforehand though. They just went from double-dipping to single dipping.

The open access pricing is different and higher than the old closed access pricing. That is the switch in all open access publishing. In any case, both the old prices and new ones are absurdly high.

The pricing is not about the cost of storing and serving the articles. It is partly direct revenue replacement and partly “stick” to get institutions to subscribe to APC allowance buckets.
Post reply on HN