/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11157677]

Peer review without journals
In the age of information in which we live have journals become outdated in their ability to be objective and disseminate research to peers to review.
It seems prudent to have the ability to filter misguided or cluttered information. But is that really the role in which should be entrusted to an editorial staff?
With the dawn of artificial intelligence at hand,it seems prudent to develop a standard of rules for Publications in a decentralized manner. And having an AI as the publisher that can be used for basic correction of typos and formula.
It seems prudent to get away from human error when it comes to what new ideas the science literate are allowed to consider as part of the scientific community.
In conjunction with this it seems also prudent to differentiate between mathematical propositions dealing with interpretations and hard experimental data.
Too often it seems in order to get the basic two-page report on petabytes of information you have to pay upwards of $40 or more. I understand there are those who wish to make a full-time career from their theoretical and experimental research, but it seems but this method of pay first to see results any system that promotes desk-bound scientist that do no experimentation as they attempt to maximize profit by minimizing their expense and for going experimentation in many papers.
The social science of the scientific community cannot be held to some other standard as if those that claim the moniker of scientists are completely altruistic.
For science to advance: data must be free.