CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#2It'd be great if this could one day be a real alternative to Elsevier.
Today, professors and postdocs are doing the peer-review for Elsevier, for free. They can do that because they get a paycheck from the government (through university and grants). Then, the governments pay for Elsevier access through university libraries, ontop of that. It'd be much more efficient, if everybody could just publish and subscribe for free on a publicly funded platform.
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#3> In the five years since its launch, the platform has seen steady growth and uptake across the research community, with more than 1,200 articles published.
That actually doesn't seem like a lot (240 articles per year), but I suppose they're still in the process of gaining traction.
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#4It'd be great if this could one day be a real alternative to Elsevier. Today, professors and postdocs are doing the peer-review for Elsevier, for free. They can do that because they get a paycheck from the government (through university and grants). Then, the governments pay for Elsevier access through university libraries, ontop of that. It'd be much more efficient, if everybody could just publish and subscribe for…
There are many more publishers than Elsevier for scientific publications, some of which are already following a strictly open access policy.
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#5[dead]
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#6[deleted]
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#7It'd be great if this could one day be a real alternative to Elsevier. Today, professors and postdocs are doing the peer-review for Elsevier, for free. They can do that because they get a paycheck from the government (through university and grants). Then, the governments pay for Elsevier access through university libraries, ontop of that. It'd be much more efficient, if everybody could just publish and subscribe for…
Arxiv and the internet do more for science than Elsevier. They're rent-seeking middlemen, having lost any of whatever their purpose might once have been.
I think the worst part is, Elsevier could still serve a purpose and make money by curating and leveraging reputation even if all academic research was openly published and freely accessible - they could select what they consider to be the best research, have editorial content, produce visualizations and accompany content with a high quality of journalism, like Quanta. Papers being locked, researchers and institutions paying out the nose, and the other artificial scarcity / artificial stupidity features are entirely unnecessary.
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#8It'd be great if this could one day be a real alternative to Elsevier. Today, professors and postdocs are doing the peer-review for Elsevier, for free. They can do that because they get a paycheck from the government (through university and grants). Then, the governments pay for Elsevier access through university libraries, ontop of that. It'd be much more efficient, if everybody could just publish and subscribe for…
There are many more publishers than Elsevier for scientific publications, some of which are already following a strictly open access policy.
Open access typically means authors pay a publication fee, which leads to the same result of the government paying twice and the journal profiting twice.
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#9It'd be great if this could one day be a real alternative to Elsevier. Today, professors and postdocs are doing the peer-review for Elsevier, for free. They can do that because they get a paycheck from the government (through university and grants). Then, the governments pay for Elsevier access through university libraries, ontop of that. It'd be much more efficient, if everybody could just publish and subscribe for…
There are many more publishers than Elsevier for scientific publications, some of which are already following a strictly open access policy.
And most of those require ridiculous "article processing charges". Even non-profits. Elsevier is bad, but it's not much worse than other publishers.
Author (in practice author institution, in practice with public funds) pays open access is less bad than locking articles behind paywalls, but it's still a racket.
This CERN system is about diamond open access, meaning that neither authors nor readers pay.
Re: CERN to host a new phase of Open Research Europe
#10This should have been in the article:
Diamond Open Access (or Platinum OA) is a scholarly publishing model where journals and platforms are free for both readers and authors, with no Article Processing Charges (APCs).