Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nature Debate on Open Scientific Journals

Posted by michael on from the DIY dept.

Declan Butler writes "I thought I'd let you know that the journal Nature is currently running an online special on the debate over access to the electronic scientific literature. It will be updated with two to three new articles each week, and will run until around mid-May. 'The Internet is profoundly changing how scientists work and publish. New business models are being tested by publishers, including open access, in which the author pays and content is free to the user. This ongoing web focus will explore current trends and future possibilities.' Best, Declan Butler, European correspondent, Nature"

3 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. a good start by untermensch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm glad to see that Nature is at least taking an interest in Open Science, since right now the high profile journals like Nature are the most difficult to get access to. The university I attend has a subscription of course, but only for the dead-tree version. I've asked the librarians about getting online access and they say it is simply prohibitively expensive.

    I think that Scientific journals should take a cue for the mistakes of the music industry and embrace the abilities of new technology. By moving from paper magazines to web-published journals they can cut distribution costs enormously, hopefully to the levels where they can survive on ads (or other non-subscription means) alone. Also, unlike the music industry there's none of this controversy over file-sharing and authors not getting paid.

    1. Re:a good start by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My University had subscriptions available online for anyone with a valid University acct. So our entire school population could read the online journals for "free." It still cost the school a ton of money each year to keep the subscription. Is that what you mean by "online for anyone to access?"

      I'm not sure I like the idea of having authors pay to have their work accepted. Underfunded studies/authors may not be able to afford submissions. That would lead to less exposure, and increasing obscurity. Of course, this is me not knowing the exact details of how much it would cost for a submission, but I guess it would have to be substantial in order to foot the bill for their journal in the first place.

  2. Re:Public grants = free publication by GileadGreene · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If the research is funded in whole or in part by the taxpayers, then ALL research results must be published and made freely available to ALL taxpayers. I can see no room for argument there.

    Unless the research is classified...