|
Maera Sior posted:Hah. You still expect the university to be paying for all those publications in print when they can do a bulk order of some of them without sacrificing any shelf space? How are you a graduate student and have literally no idea what a librarian does. Heres a hint: they're the ones that manage those digital subscriptions.
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:How are you a graduate student and have literally no idea what a librarian does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Maera Sior posted:A lot of them have had funding axed over the years. And no, they weren't When I was in grad school and needed old papers they didn't have, the librarians contacted other libraries who lent their stuff to my library so I could have access.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Day Man posted:When I was in grad school and needed old papers they didn't have, the librarians contacted other libraries who lent their stuff to my library so I could have access. I've talked to the USDA library around the corner, and sometimes they can get materials for me and sometimes they can't. It always takes longer than I have. ETA: Just did a quick check. My institution only gives me digital access to Nature after a 12 month embargo and they don't have anything in dead tree format past 2012. 
Maera Sior fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Sep 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Maera Sior posted:Those digital subscriptions can be massively expensive. They're not going to get it for one student. That's what grant money is for. You do not need a digital subscription to get a journal article. You go to a librarian, say what you need and they find a way to get it to you. You are correct, there may be a cost associated with it, however that cost is unlikely to be paid by you even if its only course work. There are limited use subscriptions that are only available to the librarians, there are negotiated discounts that they may have a fund for, there are inter library loans, there are any number of other ways to get you what you need. The point is that their entire job is to get research related articles, books, papers, whatever else to researchers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:How are you a graduate student and have literally no idea what a librarian does. They also do inter-library loans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Again, see the problem above re: speed. If you're writing your grant/thesis intro/manuscript right now, waiting a month for a paper to come through inter-library loan may not be an option.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:You do not need a digital subscription to get a journal article. You go to a librarian, say what you need and they find a way to get it to you. You are correct, there may be a cost associated with it, however that cost is unlikely to be paid by you even if its only course work. There are limited use subscriptions that are only available to the librarians, there are negotiated discounts that they may have a fund for, there are inter library loans, there are any number of other ways to get you what you need. 100% of these options are much slower than pirating a paper which, again, means that people will pirate poo poo until a netflix style solution with maximum convenience and access speed for a very modest fee exists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 21:08
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Again, see the problem above re: speed. If you're writing your grant/thesis intro/manuscript right now, waiting a month for a paper to come through inter-library loan may not be an option. If you're at the very start of your PhD and you're gathering resources while you figure out what exactly you're doing, it's perfectly fine to wait for everything to arrive. If you get assigned your topic a week before the presentation, you're screwed. Add in the problems of a remote location or foreign country and it's incredibly obvious why sites like ResearchGate have such a draw.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
ILLiad and numerous equivalents exist. They usually take 1-2 days if you're in the continental US.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Of course, if you really need a paper in a hurry and don't have access through the journal, it usually works to just e-mail one of the authors and request a pdf. Most authors're happy to send one right away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Buffer posted:Truck driving is super, super heavily subsidized - as in, the fees, tolls, etc. paid by trucks comes no where close to covering the wear and tear trucks put on roads. If that subsidy was removed the cost per mile could nearly double from that alone. Is the expectation that this continues for automated vehicles? If so, it's a tough sell now while those subsidies function as a backdoor jobs program, what's the justification when they don't? Remember that all of those now-displaced truckers still get to vote and none of the trucks do. Do you have anything more to read about this? It sounds fascinating and I would love to see the numbers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
You could jump through all of those hoops to get a journal article, but it would be so much more efficient to just hop online and download it. And how much better could be the quality of your research if you didn't have to know exactly what you wanted before you could get a look at it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
Social sciences are pushing hard for open access. Linguistics, at least, has a new open top-tier journal, and computational linguistics (my subfield) has been open for a long time. None of my papers are behind a paywall.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Nice. Unpaid internships for those with an MD or PhD and an outstanding academic track record. This makes me so mad. How can a bank not be willing to pay interns who have PhDs? They even pay their undergrad interns. Do people actually apply for these things? Do they really expect to attract anyone of quality like this or do they just not care?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Ccs posted:This makes me so mad. How can a bank not be willing to pay interns who have PhDs? They even pay their undergrad interns. The types of banks who don't pay these people are the ones who don't pay summer analysts either. They are jokes and only the people who are absolutely desperate to work in "investment banking" work there. Think a 10 man office that never leads any deals and is one bad quarter away from not existing
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
That's nothing. There are places that charge a fee to do an internship with them. http://www.ibtimes.com/paying-fee-work-free-pricey-intern-placement-services-raise-eyebrows-among-fair-wage-1686392
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Yikes, though I always assumed those kind of internships would apply to things like fashion that appeal to rich undergraduates with their heads in the clouds. But assuming someone with an MD from a top school is going to work for free on Wall Street is just insane.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
how is doing research a legal use of an unpaid internship
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:how is doing research a legal use of an unpaid internship I don't think it is and I don't think the tiny boutique shops even have any type of real compliance team in any way. Those places are complete amateur hour and knowingly and unknowingly break laws every hour because they are too lovely to exist otherwise. On the bright side, they are so inconsequential that every one of them could go under at the same time and it wouldn't even be a blip.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Ccs posted:This makes me so mad. How can a bank not be willing to pay interns who have PhDs? They even pay their undergrad interns. The job market is brutal and not really getting any better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
Scientific journals are a loving racket. The feds pay for the research, the researchers do all of the labor and the reviewers are all volunteers. Then Elsevier turns around and charges huge subscription fees. At least they are better than professional journals where 90% of the articles are never read or cited.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:how is doing research a legal use of an unpaid internship Internships are full of all sorts of illegal bullshit. So, so many of them in every industry (some are worse than others, mind) are literally just working for free which is, of course, illegal but the law just tends to not get enforced for...some reason. No idea why. Programming at least generally pays interns but that's because there's just a huge shortage of coders in general.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:"hounded by the government" meaning was subject to an entirely conventional criminal prosecution for scraping massive amounts of information from a non-profit digital library.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:"hounded by the government" meaning was subject to an entirely conventional criminal prosecution for scraping massive amounts of information from a non-profit digital library. It's really cute when people use nonprofit as if holding that legal status means anything about the financial motives or morality of an organization. Like I get your whole gimmick is knee-jerk defending academia against any and all criticism, but good lord it makes you look dumb sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:Scientific journals are a loving racket. The feds pay for the research, the researchers do all of the labor and the reviewers are all volunteers. Then Elsevier turns around and charges huge subscription fees. At least they are better than professional journals where 90% of the articles are never read or cited. It's a role begging to be filled by a national public service, like health care. pr0zac posted:It's really cute when people use nonprofit as if holding that legal status means anything about the financial motives or morality of an organization. I also disagree with Vox's position, but it's very common and perfectly reasonable. There's no reason not to give them the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
Ccs posted:This makes me so mad. How can a bank not be willing to pay interns who have PhDs? They even pay their undergrad interns. It happens more than you'd imagine, and in all kinds of fields. A colleague of mine, a lawyer finishing her PhD, applied for a job. After a two week paid internship at this company's legal department, so she'd familiarize herself with the job, she was told she was a great asset, and that they'd like to keep her on board. "We saw that you have this part time position at the University... So how about you join us, full time, for free? We'll pay your travel costs!" After she said no they then offered a salary, but she turned them down anyway. Never underestimate what a company will try to get away with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:ILLiad and numerous equivalents exist. They usually take 1-2 days if you're in the continental US. If your workflow for writing a chapter or looking up some method is not supposed to include wasted days of waiting, 2 days are very long. It's 2016 and non-instantaneous access to publications needs to die in a fire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Not super thread-germane but more germane than science publication stuff, a good write-up of the NYC restaurant scene and how it has some similarities to silicon valley: http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/the-thrill-of-losing-money-by-investing-in-a-manhattan-restaurant
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:It's really cute when people use nonprofit as if holding that legal status means anything about the financial motives or morality of an organization.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
Ccs posted:This makes me so mad. How can a bank not be willing to pay interns who have PhDs? They even pay their undergrad interns. Why do you think most professors refuse to deal with funding their research through the private sector?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Why do you think most professors refuse to deal with funding their research through the private sector? Universities actually discourage professors from seeking funding from the private sector in some cases since they aren't allowed to charge as much overhead. You get a lot less support when trying to get money from someone who'll only let them charge 35% of the grant to overhead than NIH or NSF.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Why do you think most professors refuse to deal with funding their research through the private sector? Often it is because the research is totally irrelevant and not interesting to anybody in the private sector. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 04:20 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
The charges against Swartz were among the strongest available under the law because that's how prosecution works. The entirely conventional practice is to raise the maximum in order to encourage a plea deal- the whole reason for the additional charges in Swartz's case was because he decided he wanted to plead not guilty and force the government to spend millions of dollars on the case, despite his obvious guilt on the much lighter initial charges. JSTOR is not a vulture hiding behind its nonprofit status. Its explicit purpose since the time of its foundation was to accelerate and improve the availability of research. That Swartz targeted them, and tried to scrape their databases, just highlights the absurdity of the ideology and actions involved. It's not as if he was chaining himself to the doors of the Barker library, or publishing internal profit reports from Elsevier. It turns out that information doesn't want to be free- in fact there is a cost if we want to be able to know or keep its value. People want information to be free, and they also don't want to see or experience the costs involved. I mean, this is a familiar story. A group wants something, vaguely conceives of how it could be done more efficiently with technology, ignores associated costs, objections and obstacles, and then rationalizes ignoring the law in pursuit of their convenience. The difference is this time the group in question is people in academia, and some of the people being inconvenienced are goons. Doc Hawkins posted:It's a role begging to be filled by a national public service, like health care. This is being worked on- and it's something that was being worked on before people started stealing large amounts of information from publishing databases. Hell, I'm indirectly working on it-it's a part of my broader research on miscommunication within and between scientific discourses. Inconsistent availability of past research is a major culprit in the development of pointless conflict in scientific discussions. I'm looking forward to removing that problem as much as anyone. It turns out, though, that regardless of their price-gouging nature, the stuff publishers did was complicated and expensive. Attempts to replace them with various kinds of free or open journal do not consistently work, or turn out not to be able to sustain their quality because of upkeep costs and unexpected issues. To make things worse, the desired end goals of more available journals are commonly conflated with other goals found in the FOSS movement, producing disruptions in academic and scientific discourse. Will all academic publications be freely available to all users, with the government paying the costs of maintenance, upkeep and editing? Yes- eventually, mostly. The final system will probably be less free or centralized than anyone would like, in part due to ongoing disagreements within and between both academic and government stakeholder groups about what the final product should look like. In the meantime, we still don't need to pretend that our desire for convenience and free stuff is any more of a license to break the law than it is when Uber or Thiel do it. silence_kit posted:Often it is because the research is totally irrelevant and not interesting to anybody in the private sector. Also, even interested and generous private sector funding sources tend to suck as people who can indirectly control research. There are a lot of nightmare stories about not only corporate bias in research, but also just having to coordinate and maintain funding from people who don't know the field involved, or how research works generally.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:It turns out that information doesn't want to be free- in fact there is a cost if we want to be able to know or keep its value. People want information to be free, and they also don't want to see or experience the costs involved Are you an idiot? Do you think that the academic publishing companies charge exorbitant fees because it is expensive to host .pdfs on a website and have volunteers do all of the work? There's no way in hell that academic publishing companies are operating anywhere close to at cost. Discendo Vox posted:Also, even interested and generous private sector funding sources tend to suck as people who can indirectly control research. There are a lot of nightmare stories about not only corporate bias in research, but also just having to coordinate and maintain funding from people who don't know the field involved, or how research works generally. In many areas of applied science, academia actually lags behind what industry is doing. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 04:47
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:It turns out that information doesn't want to be free- in fact there is a cost if we want to be able to know or keep its value. This is summarily not true. The entire premise of a paid journal in of itself is self defeating, because putting yourself behind a paywall hurts your own impact factor. People publish to journals with higher impact factor- not to those that are the most expensive to get articles from. I mean it would be great if the the money for these journals actually went to reviewers or to higher quality editors, but in my own experience within academia this is simply not the case.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 05:17
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:This is summarily not true. The entire premise of a paid journal in of itself is self defeating, because putting yourself behind a paywall hurts your own impact factor. People publish to journals with higher impact factor- not to those that are the most expensive to get articles from. You are missing my point. Maintaining and curating journals and the information within them costs money. That some parts of that process are currently done voluntarily doesn't remove that problem- and indeed, volunteer reviewing and editing brings with it a number of additional problems and perverse incentives, as do efforts at reform that involve replacing or modifying peer review. And just because the other parts of running an academic journal aren't things you see getting done, doesn't mean they are easy or free. Like food safety or employment regulations, it turns out there's a reason the current system is structured the way it is, and changing it in a way that's not deeply destructive requires more than taking all pdfs in existence and crowdsourcing file tags for them. silence_kit posted:Are you an idiot? Do you think that the academic publishing companies charge exorbitant fees because it is expensive to host .pdfs on a website and have volunteers do all of the work? There's no way in hell that academic publishing companies are operating anywhere close to at cost. I didn't say they operate at cost-of course they don't. I said that information, including the work involved in setting up and maintaining journals, much of which is not visible to consumers, has a cost. The costs associated with organizing and maintaining academic databases are one of the continuous obstacles to federalizing them- no one wants to be fully on the hook for it. For example, one of the closest things to a success in this area, PMC, works because a lot of the preliminary work is done by publishers. PMC exists primarily through the collaboration of several larger entities in medicine (not least of them the federal government) applying pressure to the publishing industry. It's an outgrowth of PubMed, which was itself created in no small part so that entities like PMC could later be created. There's already work being done on these things, work that started almost as soon as people in the federal funding agencies realized the internet was going to be a thing. At the same time, the costs and conflicts in ideology that have to be resolved before academic publishing can be rendered fully public are massive.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 05:48
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:JSTOR is not a vulture hiding behind its nonprofit status. Its explicit purpose since the time of its foundation was to accelerate and improve the availability of research. That Swartz targeted them, and tried to scrape their databases, just highlights the absurdity of the ideology and actions involved. It's not as if he was chaining himself to the doors of the Barker library, or publishing internal profit reports from Elsevier.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The charges against Swartz were among the strongest available under the law because that's how prosecution works. The entirely conventional practice is to raise the maximum in order to encourage a plea deal- the whole reason for the additional charges in Swartz's case was because he decided he wanted to plead not guilty and force the government to spend millions of dollars on the case, despite his obvious guilt on the much lighter initial charges. It happens all the time, but it is considered unethical, so prosecutors make up all sorts of reason. Also, overcharging to extract pleas is generally considered a major problem with the USA's office as it coerces people into pleaing. People aren't actually supposed to be punished for exercising their constitutional rights. The Schwartz case wasn't an aberration -- it was a standard federal case, but that doesn't make it any more ethical. It was pretty much roundly condemned by everyone, though if he'd been a black guy charges with possession they would have done the same thing and no one would have cared.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 05:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
Thank you for your research, Discendo Vox. I'm glad somebody's attacking this problem. Good luck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 06:10
|
|
