also, you're showing your ignorance about peer reivew. it's not just a rating after a paper is complete, like rotten tomatoes. it's feedback before teh paper was finalized. 1) the reviewers provide advice on how to make a paper stronger. 2) the reviewers reject bad papers, ensuring that they don't see the light of day. crowdsource that!
you can crowdsource a lot of thigns, but you can't crowdsource expert opinion. "4 out of 5 dentists agree, white strips are good for your teeth!" To put it another way, do you get your medial advice off of webmd, or do you go see a doctor? nuff said. no need to reply, there's not really anything more to say.
Money-making isn't the problem here. The problem is that the money-making model ends up limiting access to information, which we're calling a bad thing. Instead, you need a money-making model that results in open information (a good thing). Even if papers are freely disseminated, you need the following services:
* peer-review coordination and facilitation
* copy editing and type setting
* distribution and storage repository. Other posters have commented on the dangers of papers no longer being available.
* outreach to encourage research in the field of interest, encourage submissions. Being a booster to the field, so to speak.
* tie-ins with conferences. Finding ways to actively grow the field, rather than be passive.
* facilitate connections among researchers. Be like a social network for people in the same field.
Whatever. 4 conference papers, 3 journal articles. varying degrees of junk. but I gotta get published! It would be much easier if I could just post any crap online, because then I wouldn't have to jump through any hoops for rigor or accuracy.
this "amazingly weak algorithm" has worked for science for hundreds of years, and we've achieved our greatest accomplishments on the back of this "weak" system. In the meantime, we have "vibrant" communties like/. or digg where people waste their time saying inane things. QED.
I see you deduced that "noh8rz3" follows "noh8rz2" and "noh8rz". You're onto me, sherlock! Truth is, I create and use these accounts sequentially, because when I speak truth to power people mod me down into oblivion, essentially silencing any dissent. So by creating new accounts I'm doing my small part to keep slashdot a lively community. you're welcome.
here's a fact that blew my mind when my advisor told me - 90% of published articles are wrong. If this gets through the peer review process, how are you going to tell through your search bot which is best?
NO!!!! the whole point of peer review is to judge a paper BEFORE it is published. whatever. I'm sick of this thread. a bunch of egghead wannabees thinking they know what goes into academic work. I'm in academia, and I know how critical the peer review process and certification (call it thumbs up, or blessing) is. Go back to your IT job.
Meantime, in many ways better than peer review is number of citations. The more a paper is cited, the more significant it is thought to be.
that's super, but...
peer review is intended to vet the paper BEFORE it's published - you know, when it doesn't have any citations? Also, peer review isn't just a thumbs up / thumbs down. You get valuable feedback from leaders in your field, and can redo your paper and research so make it stronger. I don't have the link but search youtube for "hitler third reviewer" for a funny video on the topic.
The actual method (cryptography) isn't the issue. I'm sure it's easy to solve. The problem is having a transparent certified process for peer review. Where people say "ahh, they used the noh8rz3 method, so I can rely on it." This is the true value of the journal. It can be replaced by a company that facilitates peer review. But it will cost money up front.Get that piece of the puzzle, and open access is viable and won't destroy academia.
Here's your answer - open access is just one piece of the puzzle, and without a peer review certification process it is meaningless. If you're a senior academic and leader in your field, then your reputation precedes you and people will turn to your stuff regardless of peer review. But if you're a junior academic / post doc, perhaps your stuff is legit or perhaps it is crap and you're pushing it out the door to up your publication count. We need a certified peer review process for this.
FYI, these open access internet journals, you typically have to pay money for the paper to get peer reviewed. I'm fine twith that. as long as there's a process!
The only thing that needs to be done is for the researchers to be organized, but that is something that can be done cooperatively and which does not require a publishing company to facilitate.
I can see a role here for a peer review facilitiator to come in, manage the process, and give it a certification that the industry accepts as valid. Perhaps this would cost the publishing institution ~$1000, but then the paper would be free to all.
Once this piece of the puzzle comes into place, then I agree that journals can go by the wayside. You wanna go into business?
1) academia operates on reputation, so a paper in a more rigorous journal does and should carry more weight. This is a good thing because it helps separate good work from the junk.
2) You say things like "papers can be..." but I'm saying that online access is worthless unless there is a certified transparent peer review process. I await your suggestions...
no, the internet has made this question more relevant than ever. In a time of free and rapid dissemination of information, how can we judge the validity of that information. This is especially important if you're going to suggest supplanting a peer reviewed journal with open access. I await your answer!
No, you're not being complete. In order for open access to replace journals, there must be a rigorous, transparent method of peer review. A good journal definitely has a good peer review process, but how would I know if an article posted online has been peered review? perhaps you propose a public discussion system, but then every article is like an entry on slashdot:/
Typically, when you submit to a journal you give them the copyright for publishing your work, and can't publish it elsewhere. Is ucsf saying that they won't publish their articles in any more journals? ThT seems like. Step bCkwRds.
Yes, but without journals, how will we per-judge the quality of others' work? This may sound facetious, but it's not. Any fool can write a journal article, and many fools can write compelling article. A journal offers getting and review by members in the field. How else can I judge the validity of a paper, especially if I'm not in the field myself?
the apple tv costs $99 and it has wifi built in. The apple airport express also costs &99 and is a full fledged wifi base station. How could they not squeeze it into the raspi?
You can but a USB dongle to connect to Ethernet. For the 0.001% of the time that you need it. My laptop's Ethernet jack is used less often than my grandma's coochie.
The question still stands, wtf?! Total fail if my deck of cards sized computer needs wired Internet. Heck, even many top tier notebooks are dropping the Ethernet port!
I really like safari on Mac, win, and iOS. The win version is a little annoying in that they try to recreate the Mac experience and I think they go too far with the chrome etc, but it's still fast and sturdy. Also they don't sell your data.
Slashdot Mirror
also, you're showing your ignorance about peer reivew. it's not just a rating after a paper is complete, like rotten tomatoes. it's feedback before teh paper was finalized. 1) the reviewers provide advice on how to make a paper stronger. 2) the reviewers reject bad papers, ensuring that they don't see the light of day. crowdsource that!
you can crowdsource a lot of thigns, but you can't crowdsource expert opinion. "4 out of 5 dentists agree, white strips are good for your teeth!" To put it another way, do you get your medial advice off of webmd, or do you go see a doctor? nuff said. no need to reply, there's not really anything more to say.
* peer-review coordination and facilitation
* copy editing and type setting
* distribution and storage repository. Other posters have commented on the dangers of papers no longer being available.
* outreach to encourage research in the field of interest, encourage submissions. Being a booster to the field, so to speak.
* tie-ins with conferences. Finding ways to actively grow the field, rather than be passive.
* facilitate connections among researchers. Be like a social network for people in the same field.
Holy cow, this could be epic!
wow, AC nailed it. +1.
my company blocked the ports for dropbox so it won't sync while i'm at work. nothing special in terms of data; the it dept are *****.
Whatever. 4 conference papers, 3 journal articles. varying degrees of junk. but I gotta get published! It would be much easier if I could just post any crap online, because then I wouldn't have to jump through any hoops for rigor or accuracy.
this "amazingly weak algorithm" has worked for science for hundreds of years, and we've achieved our greatest accomplishments on the back of this "weak" system. In the meantime, we have "vibrant" communties like /. or digg where people waste their time saying inane things. QED.
I see you deduced that "noh8rz3" follows "noh8rz2" and "noh8rz". You're onto me, sherlock! Truth is, I create and use these accounts sequentially, because when I speak truth to power people mod me down into oblivion, essentially silencing any dissent. So by creating new accounts I'm doing my small part to keep slashdot a lively community. you're welcome.
here's a fact that blew my mind when my advisor told me - 90% of published articles are wrong. If this gets through the peer review process, how are you going to tell through your search bot which is best?
NO!!!! the whole point of peer review is to judge a paper BEFORE it is published. whatever. I'm sick of this thread. a bunch of egghead wannabees thinking they know what goes into academic work. I'm in academia, and I know how critical the peer review process and certification (call it thumbs up, or blessing) is. Go back to your IT job.
Meantime, in many ways better than peer review is number of citations. The more a paper is cited, the more significant it is thought to be.
that's super, but...
peer review is intended to vet the paper BEFORE it's published - you know, when it doesn't have any citations? Also, peer review isn't just a thumbs up / thumbs down. You get valuable feedback from leaders in your field, and can redo your paper and research so make it stronger. I don't have the link but search youtube for "hitler third reviewer" for a funny video on the topic.
The actual method (cryptography) isn't the issue. I'm sure it's easy to solve. The problem is having a transparent certified process for peer review. Where people say "ahh, they used the noh8rz3 method, so I can rely on it." This is the true value of the journal. It can be replaced by a company that facilitates peer review. But it will cost money up front.Get that piece of the puzzle, and open access is viable and won't destroy academia.
Here's your answer - open access is just one piece of the puzzle, and without a peer review certification process it is meaningless. If you're a senior academic and leader in your field, then your reputation precedes you and people will turn to your stuff regardless of peer review. But if you're a junior academic / post doc, perhaps your stuff is legit or perhaps it is crap and you're pushing it out the door to up your publication count. We need a certified peer review process for this.
FYI, these open access internet journals, you typically have to pay money for the paper to get peer reviewed. I'm fine twith that. as long as there's a process!
The only thing that needs to be done is for the researchers to be organized, but that is something that can be done cooperatively and which does not require a publishing company to facilitate.
I can see a role here for a peer review facilitiator to come in, manage the process, and give it a certification that the industry accepts as valid. Perhaps this would cost the publishing institution ~$1000, but then the paper would be free to all. Once this piece of the puzzle comes into place, then I agree that journals can go by the wayside. You wanna go into business?
1) academia operates on reputation, so a paper in a more rigorous journal does and should carry more weight. This is a good thing because it helps separate good work from the junk. 2) You say things like "papers can be..." but I'm saying that online access is worthless unless there is a certified transparent peer review process. I await your suggestions...
no, the internet has made this question more relevant than ever. In a time of free and rapid dissemination of information, how can we judge the validity of that information. This is especially important if you're going to suggest supplanting a peer reviewed journal with open access. I await your answer!
No, you're not being complete. In order for open access to replace journals, there must be a rigorous, transparent method of peer review. A good journal definitely has a good peer review process, but how would I know if an article posted online has been peered review? perhaps you propose a public discussion system, but then every article is like an entry on slashdot :/
Typically, when you submit to a journal you give them the copyright for publishing your work, and can't publish it elsewhere. Is ucsf saying that they won't publish their articles in any more journals? ThT seems like. Step bCkwRds.
Yes, but without journals, how will we per-judge the quality of others' work? This may sound facetious, but it's not. Any fool can write a journal article, and many fools can write compelling article. A journal offers getting and review by members in the field. How else can I judge the validity of a paper, especially if I'm not in the field myself?
the apple tv costs $99 and it has wifi built in. The apple airport express also costs &99 and is a full fledged wifi base station. How could they not squeeze it into the raspi?
I never said that the compuper has wifi or bt. i questioned why it does not, and still question it because it is a very bad design decision.
You can but a USB dongle to connect to Ethernet. For the 0.001% of the time that you need it. My laptop's Ethernet jack is used less often than my grandma's coochie.
The question still stands, wtf?! Total fail if my deck of cards sized computer needs wired Internet. Heck, even many top tier notebooks are dropping the Ethernet port!
wait, it doesnt have built-in wireless? what's the point of a wearable computer if it cant connect wirelessly with blutoot and wifii?
I really like safari on Mac, win, and iOS. The win version is a little annoying in that they try to recreate the Mac experience and I think they go too far with the chrome etc, but it's still fast and sturdy. Also they don't sell your data.