Matt Blaze: How ACM and IEEE Shake Down Science

Re:Matt Blaze: How ACM and IEEE Shake Down Science by MichaelSalib on Tuesday March 01, 2011 @01:33PM (#2276583)

I don't know where you get this.

From publishing an article in an IEEE journal? I mean, I did DARPA funded work in grad school and got it published in a journal. I understand very well that authors are generally paid. My point remains: they are not paid BY THE JOURNAL. From the journal's perspective, authors do not cost them anything.

The difference being that there are only 4 or 5 people in the world capable of producing or verifying the articles that appear in scientific journal.

And academic journals generally don't pay them a damn thing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Matt Blaze: How ACM and IEEE Shake Down Science by streptomycin on Tuesday March 01, 2011 @02:01PM (#2276706)

It's expensive to run a journal. PLoS isn't evil, but they still spend millions of dollars every year http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v441/n7096/full/441914a...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Matt Blaze: How ACM and IEEE Shake Down Science by chalst on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @04:52AM (#2279024)

Other scholarly societies have very small overheads.

[ Parent | on HN ]