On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Mark Doyle wrote:
> This "gov't should not be involved" is a slippery slope. What happens
> to funding for:
>
> 1) Harvard-Smithsonian's ADS service
> 2) PubMed, Medline, and PubMedCentral
> 3) arXiv.org
>
> All of these are more than worthy of gov't support in my opinion
> and so is PubSCIENCE. There is no mandate that out-moded
> business models should be preserved at all costs. To be
> sure this is the real point of attacking PubSCIENCE. SIIA wants
> to push us down that slope.
I agree completely, and would add only that distributed, international,
interoperable, university-based archiving, reliably mirrored,
duplicated and cached, will be our best hedge against any particular
centralized or governmental caprices in the future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stevan Harnad harnad_at_cogsci.soton.ac.uk
Professor of Cognitive Science harnad_at_princeton.edu
Department of Electronics and phone: +44 23-80 592-582
Computer Science fax: +44 23-80 592-865
University of Southampton
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/
Highfield, Southampton
http://www.princeton.edu/~harnad/
SO17 1BJ UNITED KINGDOM
NOTE: A complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing free
access to the refereed journal literature online is available at the
American Scientist September Forum (98 & 99 & 00 & 01):
http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html
You may join the list at the site above.
Discussion can be posted to:
american-scientist-open-access-forum_at_amsci.org
Received on Wed Jan 03 2001 - 19:17:43 GMT