|
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. Yes, he's an idiot. The overhead of academic journals is massively overstated and the quality of people who generate said overhead is shocking low. The value added in math/CS/physics by journals + arXiv versus arXiv alone is close to zero, and the actual cost of the value added (to academic institutions, coming from essentially volunteer work) is probably in the neighborhood of thousands of $ per person-hour worked. It's a massive inefficiency.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
Non Serviam posted:It happens more than you'd imagine, and in all kinds of fields.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 06:21
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:Yes, he's an idiot. The overhead of academic journals is massively overstated and the quality of people who generate said overhead is shocking low. You have clearly never looked at an open-access journal, because otherwise you wouldn't say something so loving stupid
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 07:24
|
|
|
This is what I meant by conflicting ideologies. A major divide between advocates of systems that do away with traditional blinded pre-publication peer review, such as arXiv, and detractors, is the availability and feasibility of blinded review, and the availability of dedicated reviewers at all. Fields with extreme internal language divisions or complexity in method or language see blinded review as impossible, and fields with highly coherent, rapid-throughput research (like math and a number of STEMs) see blinding as less necessary. That leaves...all the other fields, where blinding and peer review in advance of publication are useful to prevent social and perverse incentive effects that can pollute discourse (though there can be other problems with pure repository systems like arXiv that are more universal). What works for some doesn't work for others- but that doesn't make their fields less legitimate, their needs more valid, or "disruption" a better approach than the gradual. stakeholder-inclusive development of public/federal funding and support structures for academic publishing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 08:06
|
|
|
i am a unicorn (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 09:49
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
cheese posted:A lawyer finishing her PhD? That has to be like Caribbean Island Med School levels of debt, right? In countries like the Netherlands and France, the university pays you. In the Netherlands, where we're finishing ours, it pays well enough. You're not rich by any measure, but you are not on a Ramen diet
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:You have clearly never looked at an open-access journal, because otherwise you wouldn't say something so loving stupid There are some high-quality purely electronic, open access journals in math, like EJC and EJP. Annals of Mathematics is the single best mathematical journal and was open-access until 2008. More recently people have been working on open-access journals which are basically just arXiv overlays. The best example of this is Timothy Gowers' Discrete Analysis, a journal with an extremely high-quality editorial board.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:There are some high-quality purely electronic, open access journals in math, like EJC and EJP. Annals of Mathematics is the single best mathematical journal and was open-access until 2008. Interesting, a math sperg thinks that what works in his field applies universally in all other cases and all other disciplines. How unexpected!
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Yeah, usually it's physicists that do that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Damned mathematicians stealing are jobs!! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
e_angst posted:Interesting, a math sperg thinks that what works in his field applies universally in all other cases and all other disciplines. How unexpected! hobbesmaster posted:Yeah, usually it's physicists that do that. I named several fields besides math, but in any event it's hardly a controversial opinion that academics cut out the middleman (Elsevier had revenues of ~3B USD in 2015, Springer-Verlag ~1.5B) when they are the ones doing most of the paper writing, formatting, reviewing, and so on. I've published in a Springer journal before. My arXiv preprint shows up higher in Google rankings, is arguably better formatted, and -- notably -- doesn't cost $39.95 USD to read. Peer review and open-access are absolutely not incompatible or even related (all of the journals I listed are peer-reviewed!). In any event, what he said was Slanderer posted:You have clearly never looked at an open-access journal, because otherwise you wouldn't say something so loving stupid I hardly think it's being a 'math sperg' to point out that there are numerous healthy, high-quality open access journals, and entire fields that are working very hard to prevent (often publicly funded) university libraries from getting gouged. Academic CS is even less dependent on traditional publishers than math is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
In my field, law, there are many top quality open access journals. I don't know how open access works in STEM areas though, so I don't know what something like the New Journal Of Very Complex Biochemistry and Quantum Mechanics* does that it needs a large revenue to stay afloat. *not a real journal
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:In my field, law, there are many top quality open access journals. I don't know how open access works in STEM areas though, so I don't know what something like the New Journal Of Very Complex Biochemistry and Quantum Mechanics* does that it needs a large revenue to stay afloat. Don't lie- there's no such thing as a top quality law journal. (law journals are operated, edited, and usually reviewed almost exclusively by law students. Law journals are open access because they're fully subsidized as a prestige effort by law schools, used to enhance law student resumes. Good law articles tend not to be published in law journals at all, and law journal research is generally worse as a discourse than pretty much any other area I've studied for a few reasons.) Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Sep 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Don't lie- there's no such thing as a top quality law journal. Can confirm.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Don't lie- there's no such thing as a top quality law journal. That's simply not true. Even journals that are run by students do not use students as reviewers. What field are you in, and how are you judging the quality of law research? Because you're demonstrating a gigantic ignorance here. Since you use the word "subsidized," what are the enormous costs that you feel need to be covered via the predatory fees currently being charged?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:That's simply not true. Even journals that are run by students do not use students as reviewers. What field are you in, and how are you judging the quality of law research? Because you're demonstrating a gigantic ignorance here. My apologies, it's been a couple years since I studied them; I misspoke. It would be more accurate to say that the majority of law journals do not have peer review at all. Instead, student editors perform cite checks after making the initial publication decision, which is normally all that passes for review. Student staff members also frequently publish in their own institution's journal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
e_angst posted:Interesting, a math sperg thinks that what works in his field applies universally in all other cases and all other disciplines. How unexpected! Engineering journals/publications are moving that way too. IEEE Open Access being one. Dead Cosmonaut fucked around with this message at 08:58 on Sep 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:In countries like the Netherlands and France, the university pays you. In the Netherlands, where we're finishing ours, it pays well enough. You're not rich by any measure, but you are not on a Ramen diet I have to say this is a recent development, there used to be a time you didn't get paid as a PHD in the Netherlands (Dark times, as recent as 2006).
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:My apologies, it's been a couple years since I studied them; I misspoke. It would be more accurate to say that the majority of law journals do not have peer review at all. Instead, student editors perform cite checks after making the initial publication decision, which is normally all that passes for review. Student staff members also frequently publish in their own institution's journal. That's really incredible. Since it's Posner speaking, maybe it's an American situation? I've submitted articles to journals in the US, and I did have peer reviewers (as opposed to just the editor checking it out of), same in some South American journals. In Europe I personally know full professors who act as peer reviewers for law journals (not affiliated to their own university) so this situation is really surprising. The idea that my spergy article about obscure parts of the law would be reviewed and commented on by someone who doesn't understand the field is incredible. Thanks for sharing that article.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 12:21
|
|
|
Guardian editorialist John Naughton slams the special snowflake status of "tech companies"quote:The second implication is that, as Anil Dash puts it in an insightful essay, there is no “tech” industry any more. “Uber is providing predatory sub-prime leases to its drivers through its subsidiary Xchange,” he writes. “Mayonnaise startup Hampton Creek is under [inquiry] for buying back its own mayo. Amazon is going toe to toe with companies like HBO with a prestige series like Transparent. And absurdly, we’re expecting lawmakers, the media and average consumers to understand these wildly different offerings – and countless more ranging from mattresses to medical testing – as part of one single, endlessly complex industry”, namely “tech”. ^^^ points up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Physical Review E is paid-access, god bless. Keep That Impact Factor High, baby!!!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
So far I know 3 people who are working with startups. All of them are drunk on the kool-aid. None of them have any document stating what their rights are, although all of them were promised that once investment starts, they will totally get a significant share of the company. None of them believe they will get hosed. All of them think they are irreplaceable, and thus unfireable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:So far I know 3 people who are working with startups. All of them are drunk on the kool-aid. That's the stupidest possible thing. Get literally all of the promises in writing or don't accept the job, end of story. That right there is saying "feel free to dick me over any way you want." That's up there with people staying at companies that quit signing paychecks for months.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:So far I know 3 people who are working with startups. All of them are drunk on the kool-aid. Please update this thread with their outcomes when their careers implode because of the popping of the garbage fire that is the current tech bubble.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:That's the stupidest possible thing. Get literally all of the promises in writing or don't accept the job, end of story. That right there is saying "feel free to dick me over any way you want." That's up there with people staying at companies that quit signing paychecks for months. The line of thinking that answers your question is "Apple|Amazon|Microsoft|Google was a startup and look at it now! This company hasn't paid me in awhile and I clearly don't understand it's fundamentals to realize that it's destined for failure so I'll irrationally cling to it. The CEO even said it can be a $10 BILLION dollar company in two years! WHO WOULD GIVE UP ON THIS OPPORUNITY?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:So far I know 3 people who are working with startups. All of them are drunk on the kool-aid. They're about to learn a very valuable lesson the hardest possible way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Remember those people evry time a press-release-disguised-as-news talks about why it's so great for young people to get into the tech industry because of the "freedom and opportunity" it provides.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
I came to the US for a visit almost two decades ago, long before I moved here. I distinctly remember the signs at JFK warning you: "Don't get hustled." Maybe they need to put these signs up all over Silicon Valley.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
instead of colleges/grad schools having entrepeneurship classes, they should have "How not to get screwed by your employer/partner/co-workers" classes. Including the all-important "If it isn't on paper, it's not enforceable."
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
I've published many papers that are behind paywalls but have them free to download on my researchgate profile for more exposure. My lab spent a ton of money to publish already, gently caress em.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:instead of colleges/grad schools having entrepeneurship classes, they should have "How not to get screwed by your employer/partner/co-workers" classes. Including the all-important "If it isn't on paper, it's not enforceable." LOL, as if they'd ever want to arm their exploited intellectual laborers in this way. Academia is based on mass wage and IP theft from gullible, unworldly-wise students. It wouldn't do to teach them better. Roger Craig posted:I've published many papers that are behind paywalls but have them free to download on my researchgate profile for more exposure. My lab spent a ton of money to publish already, gently caress em. I can't even link to my own dissertation's abstract on Proquest, the platform on which it was mandate I publish my dissertation, because I don't have institutional access anymore. So now the whole thing's on arxiv. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:That's the stupidest possible thing. Get literally all of the promises in writing or don't accept the job, end of story. That right there is saying "feel free to dick me over any way you want." That's up there with people staying at companies that quit signing paychecks for months. fits my needs posted:Please update this thread with their outcomes when their careers implode because of the popping of the garbage fire that is the current tech bubble. Baby Babbeh posted:They're about to learn a very valuable lesson the hardest possible way. Cheesus posted:Short of the lottery, I'm not sure there's a better construct than the startup that takes advantage of the average American's inborn need to gamble. One of these friends was unable to sleep for a few days, because he was really excited about he was going to own TWENTY PERCENT of this startup. It took a while for me to explain to him that 20% of zero is, to the best of my mathematical knowledge, zero. It's basically the same story for all of them. They all work for free for these companies, or receive less than minimum wage as "freelancers," but do so happily because they think that when the company makes it big, they'll be rich. They don't understand that most startup companies fail, and so putting all your effort into something, for almost no pay, is a drat stupid thing to do. Not to mention that if the individual startup does, indeed, become a unicorn, there's basically a zero percent chance that the now-rich owners will be OK with parting with a significant percentage of their recently-acquired money. It's easy to give out 20% of zero, but 20% of 1000 ( let alone 1 million) is waaaay harder. Any and all attempts to convince them to get everything in writing, telling them that, as a loving lawyer, I routinely see people arguing "well, I don't have anything written, but he totally owes me!!!!" losing cases, have been pointless. Not only that, they are so drunk in the startup bs that they see any suggestion to be careful as trying to bring them down. One of these startups in particular sounds like a scam, since my friend was offered to be in charge of the "business side of things," despite being completely unqualified for the position (as in not knowing what a startup was, how incubators work, what Goldman Sachs is, etc.).
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:(as in not knowing what a startup was, how incubators work, what Goldman Sachs is, etc.). Everybody should know what Goldman Sachs is - a vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, desperately shoving its blood funnel into anything that smells of money. Great fit for Silicon Valley, actually.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
It's also possible that the people running the "startup" are equally clueless. I've seen this before, some people have a halfway good idea and lots of hustle, but none of the actual skills required for execution. Not that this excuses failing to get things in writing, hell even emailing them saying "hey just summarizing our conversation about xyz" puts you on much better footing down the road.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:It's also possible that the people running the "startup" are equally clueless. I've seen this before, some people have a halfway good idea and lots of hustle, but none of the actual skills required for execution. "no Man, I don't want to jinx it! "
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I came to the US for a visit almost two decades ago, long before I moved here. I distinctly remember the signs at JFK warning you: "Don't get hustled." Maybe they need to put these signs up all over Silicon Valley. We'll just have to start landing the h1-beibers directly on our extraterritorial floating IT farms, so they don't get corrupted by this statist anti-business propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:instead of colleges/grad schools having entrepeneurship classes, they should have "How not to get screwed by your employer/partner/co-workers" classes. Including the all-important "If it isn't on paper, it's not enforceable." What would be the research or body of knowledge that such a course would be based off of? Honest question. I'm sure we could get the ball rolling on that if the information was accessible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 12:13
|
|
|
We have to be pretty close to the 'startup bubble' popping, right? Even the darlings of startups like Airbnb and Uber are basically making money off of breaking the law, which as we see with Uber is costing them an insane amount in litigation and lobbying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
Morroque posted:What would be the research or body of knowledge that such a course would be based off of? Honest question. I'm sure we could get the ball rolling on that if the information was accessible. But I think everybody in the startup-adjacent community can tell you a story (or find the person whose story it is) about how companies can screw you. E: Bubbles don't pop just because people recognize they're bubbles, or recognize they ought to pop -- see dot-com one, which I can tell you was known for a bubble for at least two years. The thing is, people just invest their lives or their money on the "bigger sucker" theory: I know this is a scam, but apparently scams are doing great at the moment. What pops a bubble is investor panic, nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 14:55
|
|