internet points

To mention the obvious, it's the same network effect that keeps people on X and Reddit.

In my discipline we only pay if we want the article to be open access. Are there journals that charge $1000 and still put articles behind a paywall?

Don't forget that sometimes you also do work for that journal, telling them if a paper is good enough or not for them, and also basically don't get payed.

Publish or perish.

Academic publishing is in a very weird place and is very, very political. Its true that authors have to pay to have their papers published in most journals or conferences after they've been accepted, but like all things academic, this is highly dependent on the field. Some universities will reimburse professors publishing costs, others need to pay out of pocket or with grant/public funding.

While its true that there are open-access journals and conferences without such costs, I would wager that most well known researchers would avoid such avenues of publication due to prestige. The larger journals and conferences have review boards where the top scientists in the world sit on them. As a potential published author with such an outlet, its a great honor to even be considered. Most researchers don't want to take the risk of going with a less prestigious outlet if it will run the risk of smearing their image or damaging their ability to publish in better outlets in the future.

Source: Was a Doctoral candidate that ran the whole ringer besides the dissertation.

So here is the funny thing, with most research you're expected to get the funding, which includes wages, before you even begin the research.

Meaning you're not paying to let other people make money off your research, you're just paying for services needed for fulfilling your end of the bargain which you had previously agreed upon from the very beginning.

The cool part of all of this is that in many places when you get public funding the research can be made available to others for free after it's peer reviewed.

Honestly, if you could trust individuals in every industry with this much credit, then it is how the entire world would work. But you can't trust everyone that much.

That's why scihub is so popular

Permanently Deleted

"I just proved unified field theory. Upvotes to the left!

(Please, I need to keep my job)"

This guy, Dr. Glaucomflecken also does a ton of skits, some funny, some critical. For his most recent ones he did a satirical set, 30 days of US Healthcare, and they were both funny and depressing. I did not know some of the stuff he mentioned in those. Worth the watch.

The getting to keep your job bit is not quite right. Often, one also has to go find their own funding. Sort of based on the publications, but not necessarily.

Getting paid in exposure.

Yes, this is correct. Also, if you want to publish your dissertation, you'll need to do all editing and indexing yourself and wait like 3 years to publish it and receive about 1% of all sales

EXPOSURE

Has there been an attempt at a charity-based distribution platform, á la Wikipedia?

What‽ I've published around 5 articles, and I've never paid anything. Is this something new?

Permanently Deleted

Kinda fucked up that it's not only about being smart or having the tenacity to acquire these kind of jobs but that it's also depending on the altruistic mindset and resiliency of people. The pool of people having most if these traits is quite slim..

Publish it to social media and you get the prestige and points without paying the $1000!

After it’s published, do you get to do whatever you want with it? Like put it on your own website with a link to where it was published?

This guy missed the "funding" kpis. No one gives jobs on prestige points, you need to bring in Kilo-$ or kilo-euros

Capitalism strikes again

Did you guys pay for publishing papers? I mean, ir costs to make a paper Open-Access. But pay? What?

Same thing with most jobs - the company reaps the ongoing benefit, the worker gets paid a pittance for their time.

rEsEaRcHiNg1!1!!