

A New Publishing Model in Computer Science  - gburt
http://yann.lecun.com/ex/pamphlets/publishing-models.html

======
Rhapso
This is something I have mulling for a long time, and a fight I think is worth
starting. Lets go open access!

I am currently researching fully distributed file stores via Distributed Hash
Tables. I have been looking for viable services to convert to a fully
distributed system. This is now on the top of my list. Lets make this better!
allow all the colleges to partially serve and have backups of all the content.

------
blahedo
His description of the public reviewing system---and the idea of a review as a
versioned public document that might itself contain new ideas---made me think
of the state of affairs in the infancy of modern science, where the forerunner
of the modern journal article was literally a letter to another scientist,
which they would respond to with their own comments and ideas.

------
jekky
I personally like Yann LeCun and like this idea. However, the root problem in
CS research community is not a bad reviewing/publishing system. From my point
of view, it is the evaluation system of the so called "professor" and
researcher. The performance of the research is evaluated by the publications
(the number or the citation). So here is the consequence: only a part of good
"professor"/researcher really care about his research, all others care about
the publication instead of research. My personal experience, you can see
everywhere the "professor" push his graduate students to publish the paper.
They are engaging in making the relationships to make his paper easily be
published and make a lot of citations without any meaning. The publication is
just a medium to describe the research analysis, results, etc, the true
contribution is the research itself. Another point I want to say to learn and
teach the knowledge is a very important responsibility of a professor.
However, many professors only want to get publications from his students. So
my conclusion, if the evaluation does not change, people still will abuse the
new good review/publish system to get more publications, instead of doing
valuable research.

Another very funny thing is that until now, CS research community always
publish paper with improved results, good performance. It is definitely not
true and the experience from failure should be also a good material to share.

------
dragonwriter
This seems like a very good idea (and no need for the either the model, or
even the common platform, to be limited to CS; specialization by discipline or
area of interest would be provided by the REs.)

------
chris_mahan
There was a discussion along the same lines for GNU Encyclopedia. Shortly
after, wikipedia got started. see <https://www.gnu.org/encyclopedia/free-
encyclopedia>

