RT @ceptional@twitter.com

So I've read a lot of self-serving twaddle by academic publisher types over the last ten years, but this takes the cake... a 5-story wedding cake covered with marzipan roses and flecked with gold leaf.
This quote is just one of its laugh out loud lines. thegeyser.substack.com/p/our-i

🐦🔗: twitter.com/ceptional/status/1

oh *v funny* even for publisher bootlicker planet. Kent Anderson, of scholarly kitchen, former publisher at AAAS. CEO of RedLink, owned by Atypon, a division of Wiley -- thinks publishers are the "government" of science, and without them scientists would just go lord of the flies

also from him:
"The Surprisingly Low Burden of Subscriptions at Institutions"
and my fave
"The Core vs. the Crowd," an argument that only journal subscription models protected by benevolent info-oligopolies can protect Truth, which we know they love to do

Follow

"businesspeople in breathless disbelief that people are interested in anything but money and prestige" is one of my favorite genres.

"Scientists sacrificed their mysterious power by shitposting! There is no other reason for preprints than scientists wanting to get famous!"

"as an example of stupidity, biomedical preprinting is pretty perfect. no money to be made, so no gain" is going to be rolling around my head for awhile as the MVP of thoughts that I simply cannot fit into my brain

I am just like... no money to be made IS the gain

"preprints kill" is surreal after several years where rapid dissemination & access to information without gatekeepers has been, in fact, the *best* way for planet-scale numbers of people to keep themselves safe, and intellectual property the single *worst* thing for global health

@jonny "there is no money to be made, so no gain" is an incredible way to frame it.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.coop

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!