You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
111 points

Because of “impact score” the journal your work gets placed in has a huge impact on future funding. Its a very frustrating process and trying to go around it is like suicide for your lab so it has to be more of a top-down fix because the bottom up is never going to happen.

Thats why everyone uses sci hub. These publishers are terrible companies up there with EA in unpopularity.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

It sounds like all it would take to destroy the predatory for-profit publication oligarchs is a majority of the top few hundred scientists, across major disciplines, rejecting it and switching to a completely decentralized peer-2-peer open-source system in protest… The publication companies seem to gate keep, and provide no value. It’s like Reddit. The site’s essentially worthless. All of the value is generated by the content creators.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Succesfully iniating this from the fediverse would be such a massive boost in public visibility and discoursive strength of the project of collectivization of information infrastructure (like lemmy).

Imagine we fluffin freed science from capital and basically all the scientists openly stated how useful this was

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I can only get so erect, please stop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

(What I’m trying to say is you have my bow)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So, shall we do it?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Those few top people are assholes who love the enormous power they wield over PhD students, postdocs and junior faculty, and they are usually editors on those big name journals. Unlike the people who actually do the work, they are getting paid from this system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Ya that would be awesome and I think that movement would gain momentum really fast since most high profile labs have all had to deal with this nonsense.

That or legislation/open access rules to make these papers more accessible. One can dream.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

most high profile labs have all had to deal with this nonsense.

It’s even worse for low profile labs because those publication fees eat up a greater proportion of our budget.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

the thing that they’re supposed to provide is peer review, solve that and we’re good to go. would be easier to do with some kind of central oversight and stable funding, we’re not talking about shitposting instance for 250 people that nobody will notice if it goes down

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Even Nature publishes shit articles now and then. Impact score is becoming a joke more and more.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I know about impact factor but still this system is shit and only works because people contribute to it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science Memes

!science_memes@mander.xyz

Create post

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don’t throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 2.8K

    Posts

  • 67K

    Comments