Slashdot Mirror
Mathematicians Aim To Take Publishers Out of Publishing
ananyo writes "Mathematicians plan to launch a series of free open-access journals that will host their peer-reviewed articles on the preprint server arXiv. The project was publicly revealed in a blog post by Tim Gowers, a Fields Medal winner and mathematician at the University of Cambridge, UK. The initiative, called the Episciences Project, hopes to show that researchers can organize the peer review and publication of their work at minimal cost, without involving commercial publishers. 'It’s a global vision of how the research community should work: we want to offer an alternative to traditional mathematics journals,' says Jean-Pierre Demailly, a mathematician at the University of Grenoble, France, who is a leader in the effort. Backed by funding from the French government, the initiative may launch as early as April, he says."
Yes, think of the publishers. Think of the people who work in publishing houses. Think of everybody. Why does "think of the consequences of your actions" necessarily have to be a bad thing? He didn't say "don't do this cause someone may make less of a bonus", he said "think of the consequences of having a large group of people who are trained for one type of work now out of that work".
But information wants to be FREE! Every book should be FREE! Well, that's great and all, but how do I (theoretical publisher me) then buy food? You may think that publisher me shouldn't get money for these books, but can you please convince my landlord to not need money for rent? I mean, I'm not owning this room, I'm just taking up space. And can you have Safeway give me free food? I mean, tomatoes get their energy from sunshine, it's not like the farmer can add more sun.... Its just a plant right?
The economy is a complex system with a purchase/wage cycle at its core. Wages are not just costs, siphoned away from the system like a leaky pipe. They're also inputs to the system. The dollar you pay the publisher has some money going to the secretary who then buys coffee from Starbucks, then the barrista buys a magazine... etc. You're saying to not only pull some money from entering this cycle, but that even thinking about the hit to the cycle is a bad thing.
We're going through a sea-change in jobs. A lot of friction is going away. Jobs where people studied for years and added value for years are now disappearing very quickly. At first it was manufacturing, but people thought "oh that's low value, you don't add much" so we didn't care. Officework went next, people adding value by thinking and typing, that went away with tech. Ever hear of a secretarial pool? Probably not; jobs that added value at one time, replaced by tech. Think you're job is safe? Probably not.
What are the jobs that you think we should do? What are they jobs that are "relatively safe", meaning there are enough jobs out there where you can get one and at least make enough money to pay back your student loans for college and then make an economic profit out of your sacrifice for schooling? I'll remind you that school costs are going up, scholarships are going down, and current jobs are being lost. Oh, and you'll probably have to redo that cycle at some point, since whole industries are being downsized. Saved by Entrepreneurship? Probably not; new companies are "efficient" meaning making a lot of money, but creating few new positions. All the billions that Apple gets makes very few jobs in the US.
Hmm, manufacturing is out. Driving (taxi, trucks) soon will be (thanks Google et al). IBM's Watson beat Ken Jennings, who knows what low end mental work it can do. Lawyers are looking for work, even volunteer jobs at decent firms are at a premium. Being a doctor will be less lucrative. Where do you think these publishers should work now? Sure, take away their jobs, but at least think of the consequences?