SilasBarta comments on Knowledge is Worth Paying For - Less Wrong

45 Post author: lukeprog 21 September 2011 06:09PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (108)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: SilasBarta 21 September 2011 07:12:06PM *  9 points [-]

Those are pretty trivial compared to the costs the researchers bear to run the journals, and they're not the reason that the pay journals charge so much for an electronic version. We're basically just dealing with vestiges from a time when publishers really were necessary; now, all that a journal exists for is to certify quality, which you don't need to pay a third-party publisher for.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 21 September 2011 07:25:13PM 3 points [-]

Yeah, your point along with cousin_it's point seem to be valid. The cost being charged by many journals is much larger than the actual cost of running them. I don't know if that is completely relevant since Yvain's statement doesn't seem to be ok with even a journal that was charging at or near cost.

Comment author: fiddlemath 24 September 2011 01:46:51AM 2 points [-]

Moreover, the journal doesn't even certify quality itself. Journals ask academics to peer-review articles. I'll admit that this requires a certain amount of organization, but it's nothing that a slightly-motivated volunteer organization couldn't handle. It's certainly not worth the prices that journals demand.

(grrr, argh.)