‘Too greedy’: mass walkout at global science journal over ‘unethical’ fees

Re:‘Too greedy’: mass walkout at global science journal over... by eternalban on Sunday May 07, 2023 @02:03PM (#35853946)

> If researchers could easily browse papers relevant to them I think they would dump publishers all together. The expense of prestige can't hold up over time against a more efficient model that costs way less.

arXiv is an emerging solution. The peer review bit is missing.

https://arxiv.org/category_taxonomy

ArXiv.org Reaches a Milestone and a Reckoning 2022:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/arxiv-org-reaches...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:‘Too greedy’: mass walkout at global science journal over... by robertlagrant on Sunday May 07, 2023 @04:23PM (#35855287)

It would be good if arxiv somehow standardised how to capture methodology. E.g. population size, sample size, sample selection method, computed values to demonstrate outcome, etc etc, to make review as easy as possible. And then if the computed values are successfully challenged, they can be updated and the trust in the paper's conclusions adjusted.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:‘Too greedy’: mass walkout at global science journal over... by starbird3000 on Monday May 08, 2023 @02:48PM (#35865527)

Also missing are viable costs. If arXiv didn't have the support of some nonprofit societies and grants from foundations, it would be in significant trouble.

[ Parent | on HN ]