
The Cost of Knowledge: Researchers taking a stand against Elsevier. - llambda
http://thecostofknowledge.com/?
======
randlet
Earlier discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3501561>

~~~
tokenadult
Yeah, what's with the noncanonical URL in the submission here?

~~~
gjm11
Of llambda's 10 most recent submissions, three have the exact same pattern.
Two more have do-nothing query strings.

Perhaps there's some other explanation, but much the most likely seems to be:
When llambda finds something already submitted, s/he modifies the URL and
submits again. Please don't do that, llambda: the dupe filter is there for a
reason.

------
olihb
I really don't like Elsevier, but the alternatives don't exist

Most open Access databases are of dubious quality and don't provide an
interface for peer-reviewing. Even worst, the harvesting standard (OAI) is
implemented in many different ways depending on the site. Scopus also extract
references, citations, addresses, etc. which are necessary to compute
influence and impact.

Microsoft Academic and Google Scholar are starting to look as an alternative,
but I'm wouldn't be surprised if they licensed their data from
Elsevier&Thomson.

Until these services are duplicated in the Open Access community, Elsevier
will still be needed.

