• kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      A number of journals actually have clauses around how you can’t publish it anywhere else if they accept it.

      So you can’t ‘publish’ it in those places, but you can send it privately to people who ask.

    • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      The research was paid for by someone. It is not unheard of for a company to offer a grant under the condition that they get the results, say, six months before the rest of the world.

      • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        This the the case for publically funded research as well. Scientific journals have paper submitted for free, papers reviewed for free, then they charge the $35/article fee to anyone who reads it, or more generally, they charge universities/etcs in the 5 to 6 figures sum/year for unlimited access.

        Scientific journals are a billion dollar industry who do literally nothing for that money. They limit scientific progress to make money, and thats it.

        • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          If they review papers for “free” is that not worth something?

          I definitely don’t think it should be for profit but it seems like there is value and costs to what they do. That money has to come from somewhere.

          EDIT: I am unfamiliar with the process so I took OP’s words at face value. Several others indicate this is inaccurate. So, seems like all they do it host/publish the papers. Which does cost money, but that just seems like something that should be funded by other means rather than users paying. Kinda weird to hide science behind an arbitrary paywall.

          • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            The journals dont review anything. Other scientists do the reviews for free. Scientific prominence is a key to promotion for scientists, so they publish and review to keep and advance their jobs. Journals were built to abuse this fact.

            Scientists publish papers for free, other scientists reviews papers for free, journals charge billions/yr to publish this free work, now mostly in digital formats, a medium that is effectivly free when serving text files.

            Scientific journals are a racket, bar none. There are attempts to open source the publishing of these journals, but often if you publish in an open source one, the for profit journals will not accept the piece.

  • ZMoney@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Scientist here. I encourage everyone to use a shadow library like Scihub to break the stranglehold that Elsevier and Wiley have on the free availability of knowledge. These are financialized corporations that add nothing to society and leach off of scientists’ hard work.