I'm not arguing that it isn't easy or that they should be able to do it. I am saying that I wouldn't trust some of our authors to do it. Y'know, there's a reason why I'm scared shitless of going to the doctor after having worked here for a while... : p
Something I didn't mention is that 18000 of those 20000 subscribers get the journal as a benefit by beloning to our parent organization, who only wants to pay us about $3/yr for each member. And they've been talking about lowering that amount...
This is true. Many publishers also either have specific clauses that give authors extra distribution and reprint/reuse rights, or they have unwritten agreements giving the author those same rights. Technically in those cases, it is against the law. But the publishers are also fully aware of who makes their existence possible. Hence the blind eye approach...
I attended a seminar just yesterday presented by Allen Press on Open Access. Presentations were given by the EIC of PLoS Computational Biology, the director of the American Society for Cell Biology, the CTO of the Nature Publishing Group, as well as respresentatives from Google Scholar, CrossRef, the Association of Learned and Professional Society of Publishers, and people from various university libraries.
Overall, everyone agrees that the move to Open Access is a good idea and that information (especially scientific information) wants to and needs to be free. However, the primary concern still lies in resolving and adapting the publishing models that are employed. Several case studies were given of organizations who have moved to open access in the past several years. Their subscriptions have dropped a little over the past few years, but their page views and number of articles downloaded have skyrocketed. However, they admit that there isn't enough data to determine whether their current model has any long-term viability and sustainability. Interestingly, the keynote presented some data from several studies indicating that many of the fully open access journals out there tend to be more amateurish at this stage (far less peer-review, very high acceptance rate for submitted papers, very low/negligible impact factor/rank, less copyediting, etc), while mixed model or embargoed OA journals have retained their relevence in the scientific community.
And for those of you out there saying that there's little or nothing involved in the publishing of a scientific journal, you simply don't get it! I work for a medical publication that is run by 3 people (the exec dir/publisher, copy editor, and me, the editorial assistant). None of us are paid particularly well. However, our publication that gets out to 20,000 people still costs nearly 1/3 of a million dollars a year to publish. I agree that there are several large publishers out there who are milking everything they can out of subscribers, but for smaller publishers, the move to full open access will end up killing many of them.
I work for a medical publication and I can assure you that our authors, however brilliant they may be in their field, are simply not up to the task of providing LaTeX documents. Most are competent (at best) at using a computer. However, they can look at a radiograph and tell you exactly what's wrong and several ways to go about fixing it...
Just because there isn't any copy protection it doesn't make it legal to install it on as many machines as you want. Some people do like to have properly licensed software on their machines...
It's entirely possible that this article was already sitting in the "mysterious future" queue when you submitted your story. The one story that I submitted took about 15 or 16 hours before it was actually published, so I wouldn't worry that it's a conspiracy against you or anything...
I have a revision 1 of the BEFW11S4 that worked beautifully for about 3 years. Never hung, never needed a reboot. That being said, the last two places I've lived have had a rev. 2 and a rev. 4 version of these things. And they needed rebooting once every few days. Where I currently live, I don't have access to the router (rented basement, no physical or admin access to it), but it's become such a problem that the owner put it on a cheap timer so that it gets reset every night. If it wonks out during the evening I'm SOL until the next day. However, it saves me from having to call upstairs to ask him to reset it...
I think you mean "How long until AOL convinces XM that inserting ads into their programming is a good revenue stream?" (although exactly not what the customers want, but nevermind that...)
Free sure has taken on some funny meanings lately...Also see the "free" upgrade to Dark Age of Camelots story that ran a few days ago. You get a "free" upgrade so long as you pay their monthly service fee...
Hey! Thanks for the search. Without that I never would've known about this version of slashdot. Taking a quick look at it, it doesn't seem to suffer from the barrage of GNAA and FP trolls. Then again, it's not like I can read anything there either. But still pretty fun to look at.
You seem to be missing the point of the post above yours. If you're reading text (ie, not a pre-formated paginated PDF), then why are longer lines so much harder to read? It seems that with longer lines/shorter pages, you'd probably be able to fit more words per page than on a screen with short lines, but more of them. As for your vertical scrolling argument, doesn't that ultimately boil down to how many words can be fit on a screenful of text? I'm willing to bet the PSP can hold more in the horizontal orientation than if it were vertical.
Slashdot Mirror
exactly what i was thinking...
I dunno, but I think digital watches are pretty nifty...
I'm not arguing that it isn't easy or that they should be able to do it. I am saying that I wouldn't trust some of our authors to do it. Y'know, there's a reason why I'm scared shitless of going to the doctor after having worked here for a while... : p
Yeah, but that sounds like it wouldn't be nearly as tasty...
Does this mean that I'll be able to go buy a lightsicle soon?
Something I didn't mention is that 18000 of those 20000 subscribers get the journal as a benefit by beloning to our parent organization, who only wants to pay us about $3/yr for each member. And they've been talking about lowering that amount...
Why? I've found my tea comes out just fine. A bit sudsy, but totally drinkable...
This is true. Many publishers also either have specific clauses that give authors extra distribution and reprint/reuse rights, or they have unwritten agreements giving the author those same rights. Technically in those cases, it is against the law. But the publishers are also fully aware of who makes their existence possible. Hence the blind eye approach...
I attended a seminar just yesterday presented by Allen Press on Open Access. Presentations were given by the EIC of PLoS Computational Biology, the director of the American Society for Cell Biology, the CTO of the Nature Publishing Group, as well as respresentatives from Google Scholar, CrossRef, the Association of Learned and Professional Society of Publishers, and people from various university libraries.
Overall, everyone agrees that the move to Open Access is a good idea and that information (especially scientific information) wants to and needs to be free. However, the primary concern still lies in resolving and adapting the publishing models that are employed. Several case studies were given of organizations who have moved to open access in the past several years. Their subscriptions have dropped a little over the past few years, but their page views and number of articles downloaded have skyrocketed. However, they admit that there isn't enough data to determine whether their current model has any long-term viability and sustainability. Interestingly, the keynote presented some data from several studies indicating that many of the fully open access journals out there tend to be more amateurish at this stage (far less peer-review, very high acceptance rate for submitted papers, very low/negligible impact factor/rank, less copyediting, etc), while mixed model or embargoed OA journals have retained their relevence in the scientific community.
And for those of you out there saying that there's little or nothing involved in the publishing of a scientific journal, you simply don't get it! I work for a medical publication that is run by 3 people (the exec dir/publisher, copy editor, and me, the editorial assistant). None of us are paid particularly well. However, our publication that gets out to 20,000 people still costs nearly 1/3 of a million dollars a year to publish. I agree that there are several large publishers out there who are milking everything they can out of subscribers, but for smaller publishers, the move to full open access will end up killing many of them.
I work for a medical publication and I can assure you that our authors, however brilliant they may be in their field, are simply not up to the task of providing LaTeX documents. Most are competent (at best) at using a computer. However, they can look at a radiograph and tell you exactly what's wrong and several ways to go about fixing it...
Just because there isn't any copy protection it doesn't make it legal to install it on as many machines as you want. Some people do like to have properly licensed software on their machines...
It's entirely possible that this article was already sitting in the "mysterious future" queue when you submitted your story. The one story that I submitted took about 15 or 16 hours before it was actually published, so I wouldn't worry that it's a conspiracy against you or anything...
Better than the PG70 rating that the Uptown in DC has listed for Sin City...
I have a revision 1 of the BEFW11S4 that worked beautifully for about 3 years. Never hung, never needed a reboot. That being said, the last two places I've lived have had a rev. 2 and a rev. 4 version of these things. And they needed rebooting once every few days. Where I currently live, I don't have access to the router (rented basement, no physical or admin access to it), but it's become such a problem that the owner put it on a cheap timer so that it gets reset every night. If it wonks out during the evening I'm SOL until the next day. However, it saves me from having to call upstairs to ask him to reset it...
I think you mean "How long until AOL convinces XM that inserting ads into their programming is a good revenue stream?" (although exactly not what the customers want, but nevermind that...)
Free sure has taken on some funny meanings lately...Also see the "free" upgrade to Dark Age of Camelots story that ran a few days ago. You get a "free" upgrade so long as you pay their monthly service fee...
Yeah, I find ducks to be pretty amazing, too...
Anyone want to bet that their "fact checkers" just head over to wikipedia to check the submissions?
Hey! Thanks for the search. Without that I never would've known about this version of slashdot. Taking a quick look at it, it doesn't seem to suffer from the barrage of GNAA and FP trolls. Then again, it's not like I can read anything there either. But still pretty fun to look at.
Because you didn't RTWholeFA...
Judging from the abilities of the typical driver on the road, this post does seem to have a certain amount of truth to it...
You seem to be missing the point of the post above yours. If you're reading text (ie, not a pre-formated paginated PDF), then why are longer lines so much harder to read? It seems that with longer lines/shorter pages, you'd probably be able to fit more words per page than on a screen with short lines, but more of them. As for your vertical scrolling argument, doesn't that ultimately boil down to how many words can be fit on a screenful of text? I'm willing to bet the PSP can hold more in the horizontal orientation than if it were vertical.
Last time I checked MC Hawking was in a wheelchair, too. Dipshit...
But "hard drinks" are liquid too...
This brings up a good point. Is a liquid hard or soft?