this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
428 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

58033 readers
4094 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 208 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

I cannot handle the fucking irony of that article being on nature, one of the organizations most responsible for fucking it up in the first place. Nature is a peer-reviewed journal that charges people thousands upon thousands of dollars to publish (that's right, charges, not pays), asks peer reviewers to volunteer their time, and then charges the very institutions that produced the knowledge exorbitant rents to access it. It's all upside. Because they're the most prestigious journal (or maybe one of two or three), they can charge rent on that prestige, then leverage it to buy and start other subsidiary journals. Now they have this beast of an academic publishing empire that is a complete fucking mess.

[–] GrymEdm 89 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Wow, I never knew about that and it's not just a small fee either. This 2020 article has it at 9,500 Euro/10,300 USD. "Some observers worry Nature's €9500 publishing fee is so high that it threatens to divide authors into two tiers—those at wealthy institutions or with access to funds to pay, and everyone else."

It's already hard enough getting funding in some fields of science without that kind of added expense to put your data out there. Definitely sounds like you're right to call them out.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 months ago

Yeah, it's grotesque. Doubly so when you consider that it's often public money that funds the research that they get to paywall. I've been really ragging on them lately for their role in the AI hype, too, which you can read about here and here if that sort of thing interests you.

[–] braxy29 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/ukAkG6c_N4M?si=6LbXPPh1nd1JB1cr

https://piped.video/8F9gzQz1Pms?si=FiI1Ox2nVKalwUdg

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] neurosnail 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nb. Nature News Team is editorially independent from the Journal title "Nature".

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

I'm suspicious of this concept of editorial independence. I think it's a smoke screen that lets companies have their cake and eat it too. As far as I'm concerned, whoever cashes the checks also gets the blame, because either ownership means something, in which case the concept exists to obfuscate that, or it doesn't, in which case why is nature buying up other journals?

[–] b3an 0 points 6 months ago

Well by posting this they give the appearance of being on the good side.