I too want to open a business where both customers and suppliers pay me. Do you know any more gullible sectors? Academics are pretty extorted already it seems.
Science Memes
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !reptiles and [email protected]
Physical Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !self [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Memes
Miscellaneous
Okay, but what are the profits? That's what actually matters here.
I've only ever published in open access journals (partially because I've only got 3 papers out, but also out of preference) is it just prestige that makes people go with pay-to-view journals? or are there other factors?
In part it's prestige, which for some might matter for promotion purposes, and at least personally I'm more like to cite journals for which I know I trust their judgement in peer review and submission acceptance. There are predatory publishers which abuse the open access concept to make money, and if I'm reviewing literature I don't want to have to also research if a journal can be trusted (unless of course the publication I want to include is novel or especially worthwhile).
Also, in many contexts open access requires payment by the authors; this may be fine if an author is in a large grant-funded lab or at an institution willing to fund the open access fee but for many of us non-research-track folks it's kind of a deal breaker.
I did get paid for reviewing for a Springer journal though. Next to nothing, but it's not zero.
and don't use Sci-hub people. I am warning ⚠️ you so you can avoid it 🫡
Thank you for the warning. I almost received free and convenient access to a large catalog of academic articles, and no one wants that.
I, too have seen the ability of Sci-Hub to give me free access to research papers.
It's terrifying how easy it is to get access to scientific literature for free! Wouldn't recommend to anyone.
Before Roblox there was this...
Just here to say fuck Elsevier.
Academic Authors: $0
FAKE NEWS
This should be in the negatives. We have to pay to get papers published in these traditional journals.
New textbooks have disappearing ink that only lasts, about one semester, until a month before finals, and then in that month they trigger dynamic pricing increases due to a stronger than typical demand...
Don't give them ideas.
Don't give them ideas for free.
I heard that, you are legally allowed to Email the Academic Authors, and request said articles, which they are allowed to provide for free.
Absolutely. Plus scientists love when people want to actually read their work so you make their day too!
NGL if I was a college professor in this situation I'd be pirating my own work fuck these guys
I do it all the time. Something something sci-hub. If you ask, the authors will almost always share a preprint.
Very frequently you can email the author of the paper and they will be super happy to send you a copy.
That seems like a very lucrative market to interrupt
Reviewers and writers actually do get a stipend, but it's a token amount like 200 bucks a year. This industry is the most ass backward incentive structure we could possibly create, the only reason writers would provide articles to a journal is literally for the clout.
I've never gotten a stipend or heard of someone getting a stipend for publishing or reviewing manuscripts. The only thing I've been offered is access to the journal.
Depends on the journal I guess, my wife worked at multiple publishers and there's normally an insultingly small stipend for the editorial board members and writers
Clout and also many academic focused universities expect some set minimum of publications from their staff
They all got bought up by venture capitalists like a decade or more more ago, and this is the result.
They were already backward, but now they are backward, ruthless about cost cutting, and care about nothing but profits.
Really? I’ve reviewed and published a good chunk of papers and never received any financial compensation.
Well, you received a token amount of 0 bucks an eternity.
That's not an incentive, they're mocking you with money
Remember folks, if you pirate scientific papers you're stealing from the hard working......wait a minute....
You wouldn't download a car
I would, actually
Why stop at one?
I'd 3D print that shit so hard on my shitty little Ender.
And they wonder why...
TIL:
In the PotC universe, The legs of the pier are noclip
underwater.
This isn't a meme, it's a crime
There are literally tens of thousands of people in academia who could build a transparent, open-source, non-profit publishing system of their own.
Why don't they?
The big issue is that the individuals who lead these institutions are those who are successful with the status quo; perhaps some recognize the importance of changing it but I perceive that most would be unwilling to dismantle a system that worked well for them.
I don't know about other fields, but we did do this for AI. It's all community-run, papers are freely available for everyone to read, and the cost of submission in a peer-reviewed venue is to review other papers. The publishers don't actually provide anything of value except name recognition and being "reputable", which they maintain through momentum.
There is a transitioning happening but progress churns slowly. I like to compare it to getting out of an abusive relationship.
https://sparcopen.org/our-work/big-deal-knowledge-base/unbundling-profiles/mit-libraries/
Corruption - at the highest level.
Well I don't know about "highest" level.
It's in some ways worse than that. it's institutional corruption and collusion across all levels of power within institutions. Not having access to pear review, journals, the gravitas, the funding sources:it creates a monopoly of power for all players in the system where they aren't benefited by opening up access
but wait...
where meme part ?
Internet memes come from the original concept of memes as an element of culture passed on from person to person.
From Wikipedia's "internet meme" article.