There's another side to this, which is that people who sell things often try as 
hard as they can to make those things seem essential and otherwise 
out-of-reach.   To lead potential customers into thinking there is energy 
barrier where there really isn't.   I find I sometimes buy software or a 
(text)book when I just want to know if there is any there, there.   If I really 
need it, invariably I end up using open source software.   For example, I can't 
imagine going back to ArcGIS as now there are QGIS an various geotools for R 
(the latter two which are free).  This luxury of being able to a bit of 
lookahead by, well, wasting some money, is what LMIC scientists can't do.   
Likewise one could carefully engineer some code to do run quickly, or just slam 
down some slow scripts on a cluster and waste some energy and get the same 
answer.  It's not so clear to me that the academic publishing industry really 
adds a whole lot of value.  Heck, it's not so clear to me that recording ideas 
forever is really all that useful either, but that's another story. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of u?l? ???
Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2020 10:34 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] How Prestige Journals Remain Elite, Exclusive And 
Exclusionary | beSpacific

> “Nature might as well post a sign that says "LMICs scientists not welcome 
> here", said Catherine Kyobutungi, Executive Director at the African 
> Population and Health Research Center. “Nature is out of touch with reality. 
> It is a daily struggle for institutions like ours to financially support our 
> researchers to pay open access fees. A few funders pay these fees but only 
> for papers coming out of projects they have funded. I don't know in which 
> world Nature thinks it's okay to charge fees equal to or more than the small 
> grants many LMICs researchers can access,” she added.

It's not well-summed-up by "prestige". This topic came up in FriAM, recently, 
wherein I objected to purchasing a proprietary tool to replicate the research 
of another group, preferring a tool that *is* more available to LMIC 
researchers like R. It was amazing to me that I had to make this argument at 
all, much less the privileged counter-arguments being made, e.g. that ~$1000/yr 
for that software wasn't significant compared to what I was being paid. I'd 
much rather donate $1000/yr to the R Foundation than propagate the pay-to-play 
game being offered.

There's bound to be a similar model for publications.

On 12/3/20 9:42 AM, Tom Johnson wrote:
> https://www.bespacific.com/how-prestige-journals-remain-elite-exclusiv
> e-and-exclusionary/ 
> <https://www.bespacific.com/how-prestige-journals-remain-elite-exclusi
> ve-and-exclusionary/>



--
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe 
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Reply via email to