Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

New York Times Opinion Piece on Open Access Publishing

posted by CoolHand on Monday March 14 2016, @11:44PM   Printer-friendly
from the rip-it-open dept.

canopic jug writes:

The New York Times has an opinion piece about Open Access publishing. It starts with the case of Alexandra Elbakyan a guerilla open access activist who is on the lam from the US government acting on behalf of the copyright cartel. Pricing and other restrictions put many journals out of reach of all but the few researchers at major, well-funded universities in developed nations. The large publishing companies usually have profit margins over 30% and subscription prices have been rising twice as fast as the price of health care, which itself is priced insanely, over the past two decades, so there appears to be a real scandal there. Several options are available including pre-print repositories and various open access journals. The latter require the author to pay up front for publishing. However, the real onus lies on the communities' leaders, like heads of institutions and presidents of universities, who are in a position to change which journals are perceived as high-impact.

Edit: Alexandra Elbakyan founded Sci-Hub in 2011.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
New York Times Opinion Piece on Open Access Publishing | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 47 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Tuesday March 15 2016, @12:29AM

    by edIII (791) on Tuesday March 15 2016, @12:29AM (#318278)

    I think the idea was a brilliant way of opening access to research. Pity it never took off.

    It did, we just decided to research boobies instead of getting any work done. Thankfully, it's been wildly, wildly, successful.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday March 15 2016, @12:46AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 15 2016, @12:46AM (#318286) Journal

    It did, we just decided to research boobies...

    Yo [wikipedia.org], cow clicker [wikipedia.org].

    (are today's kids still interested in boobs?)

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by devlux on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:01AM

      by devlux (6151) on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:01AM (#318295)

      Survey says...
      http://www.usatoday.com/videos/life/people/2016/03/10/81575400/ [usatoday.com]

      Yes!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:12AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:12AM (#318296)
        Ewww! Kardashian related, everybody! Also, not safe for office.

      • (Score: 2) by MostCynical on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:30AM

        by MostCynical (2589) on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:30AM (#318301) Journal

        What is it with this obsession with... *enhanced* (ie: fake) breasts?

        --
        "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:18AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:18AM (#318326)
          Who's obsessed, precious?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @06:58AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @06:58AM (#318372)

          plastic is fantastic

    • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Tuesday March 15 2016, @03:18PM

      by Pino P (4721) on Tuesday March 15 2016, @03:18PM (#318525) Journal

      Cow Clicker is dead [wikipedia.org]; long live Cookie Clicker [dashnet.org].