Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think as time goes on we'll find that journals are able to do more and more of the work themselves in such a way that disrupts the monopoly as we know it today. Journals and the academic community already perform the review process themselves (with little reward) and are finding that the "typesetting" and "dissemination" value-adds from publishers are things that they can do on their own as well.

On a large scale, initiatives like PLOS One (http://www.plosone.org/) are a great example of this. On a smaller scale, journals like Sociological Science (http://www.sociologicalscience.com/) & (http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/stanford-gsb-experience/news-his...) are also being successful managing the entire toolchain themselves.

While things seem dire now, I'm confident they'll get better. Scholars with status are increasingly throwing their weight behind Open Access initiatives. Tim Gowers, that droque mentioned in this thread, is evidence of this.

Disclaimer: I co-founded a startup in the space (http://www.scholasticahq.com) and Sociological Science uses our platform for managing their peer review process.

PLOS One is a step in the right direction, but it just shifts the cost burden from institutions to individual professors. They do a lot to minimize that cost as much as they can, but at the end of the day PLOS gets revenue from the authors. Grants often don't include provisions for that, but maybe that will change.

I too am confident that things will continue to improve.

OT, but:

> droque

Not in the dictionary, Urban Dictionary, Google just tries to translate it from French. What is a droque?

An user name, see also "Xophmeister"

My bad: I was reading 'that' as a demonstrative, rather than a complementiser. Thanks

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact