[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 10 KB, 251x242, 1414633747087.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9462775 No.9462775 [Reply] [Original]

>2018
>scholarship is still being published behind paywalls
why is this allowed?

>> No.9462789

>>9462775
cash rules everything around us
cream
get the money
dollar dollar bill y'all

>> No.9462798

>>9462775

>hurr durr why does the nwo want to stem the free flow of information and knowledge

>> No.9462818

>>9462798
wake up sheeple

>> No.9463827

Thank god I'm in a field that uses the arXiv for everything

>> No.9465697

>>9462775
He doesn't know about sci-hub. Full on pleb.

>> No.9465713

>>9462798

It's a serious question. Why should i be billionaire to read an article ?

>> No.9465723

>>9465697
It's still a legitimate question even if you do.

>> No.9465724
File: 148 KB, 971x607, scihub.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9465724

>> No.9465729

>>9463827
Based math

>> No.9465746

>>9465713
Why are you entitled to it? (pro-tip: you aren't).

But, even though the owners of said material have no obligation whatsoever to give it to you for free, you STILL have access to all of it because you live in the wondrous digitally connected world where you can get it illegally easily. And you're STIL complaining.

>> No.9465756

>>9465746
>>9465746
>Why are you entitled to it? (pro-tip: you aren't).

Public funding comes from tax dollars, my brainlet friend.

>> No.9465780

>>9465756
To be fair, I need to know what country you're from and what uni you go to. If the government gives money to a for-profit university (which means it's just a company), then you should be mad at the government, not the company.

If you go to a real non-profit school running on government money then you have a case. You could debate whether they need the money from those papers to stay afloat, but I would agree more with you in that case.

>> No.9465784

>>9462775

It's kikes OP, c'mon.

Kikes run the journals, websites and organizations behind all of this sort of kikery. Further, yes, kikes are intelligent and disproportionately populate academia and the sciences-publishing crowd. More fundamental than the money, >>9462789, is the kikes.

>> No.9465786

>>9465780
>If the government gives money to a for-profit university (which means it's just a company), then you should be mad at the government, not the company.

Yeah, but you're still entitled to it.

OP didn't say who he was blaming for the situation.

>> No.9465790

>>9465786
No, in that case you aren't entitled to it at all.

>> No.9466810

99.9% of people couldn't understand a science article even if it was made freely available to them. The point of journal paywalls is to maintain the rigorous peer review process which requires substantial time, effort, resources, and infrastructure. I'm not a fan of the paywall, but if you're an active academic you already have free access to the articles you want anyways.

The better question is why isn't there more incentive for researchers to translate their esoteric work for a more general audience? TED Talks were supposed to be that but now they're just meams.

>> No.9467203

>>9466810
>The point of journal paywalls is to maintain the rigorous peer review process
Which we ll know that is definitely not full of gaping holes and crippling misinformation.

>> No.9467213

>>9466810
>The point of journal paywalls is to maintain the rigorous peer review process which requires substantial time, effort, resources, and infrastructure
and yet reviewers aren't paid for their work

>> No.9467216

>>9466810
Peer review is done free of charge you fucking retard.

>> No.9467724

>>9467213
>>9467216

Peer review is not free nor do editors go unpaid. Reviewers go unpaid for what is essentially an hour of reading and writing. Editors are the ones responsible for giving the articles an initial pass/fail before passing it on to selected reviewers who the editor identifies as active in the field and knowledgeable about the research topic.

Editors get paid because their jobs involve the reading, management, networking, and coordinating of hundreds of people across thousands of papers each year. No one edits for free because it is substantial work. You would be surprised how little they are paid, however.

Then there are costs associated with publishing. These articles don't just get dumped into free Dropbox accounts. They are hosted on reputable, secure, constantly updating sites and are catalogued, disseminated, and shared with other such academic networks. All of this costs money, staff, and time.

At the end of the day, anything worth anything is a business. There are people who profit from the paywalling of academia but it isn't the reviewer, the researcher, or the editor. Do the ends justify the means? Is the status quo sustainable and efficient? Should nonacademics be denied access to academic material? No.

The entire industry of science is open to suggestions. You get out what you put in, and open access journals are just not discriminating or rigorous as other paid journals.

I should also mention that the paywall only functions as a paywall if you don't have access to email. If any regular citizen comes across an article they want to read, and the article is paywalled, all that citizen has to do is email the corresponding author and they'll get that article for free. Not only that article: any supplementary materials related to the study, full data sets, other papers like it, contact info of other relevant researchers, etc.

The paywall is only a paywall if you don't want to talk with people.

>> No.9467757

If you can't find it for free on Google Scholar, it probably doesn't matter anyways.

>> No.9467775

>>9462775
Non academics have no need for science papers, what can you do with them? you cant even understand the abstract.

Join an institution if you want access.
This guy is 100% right >>9466810

>> No.9467778

>>9467724
Ask anyone on any editorial board and you will learn that editors are also unpaid you colossal retard. The only people who get paid by a journal are the non-academic leaches who provide no benefit to science.

>> No.9467782

>>9462775
>why is this allowed?
Why do the scholars allow it is a better question. Give credit where credit is due.

>> No.9467793

>>9467724
>Reviewers go unpaid for what is essentially an hour of reading and writing.
Maybe for brainlet experimental papers.

>> No.9467797

>>9467778

I've edited two journals. They paid me FTE with a business credit card and free travel to academic conferences. If you or your friends are editing for free, please aggressively interrogate your life choices because this means you are editing for a journal that is not affiliated with your industry organizations.

I said editor and I mean editor. Not associate editor.

>> No.9467803

>>9467797
That's not the standard in every field.

>> No.9467947

>>9462775
Publishing in journals that are behind paywalls is considered prestigious, because prestigious people publish in journals that are behind paywalls, because publishing in journals that are behind paywalls is considered prestigious, because prestigious people publish in journals that are behind paywalls, because publishing in journals that are behind paywalls is considered prestigious, because prestigious people publish in journals that are behind paywalls, because publishing in journals that are behind paywalls is considered prestigious, because prestigious people publish in journals that are behind paywalls, because publishing in journals that are behind paywalls is considered prestigious, because prestigious people publish in journals that are behind paywalls, because publishing in journals that are behind paywalls is considered prestigious, because prestigious people publish in journals that are behind paywalls, because publishing in journals that are behind paywalls is considered prestigious.