Stevan Harnad wrote:
> The only question is about what active researchers, with finite
> lifetimes, eager to maximize their scientific productivity and impact,
> ought to do in the meanwhile, and I think it is completely obvious to
> anyone who thinks about it (the logic of it, the justice of it, and the
> pragmatics of it) exactly what that is. The contributors to Los Alamos
> have already shown us all the way.
> That era is now over for this special literature, and it is entirely up
> to us when we elect to reap the scientific benefits of that fact. The
> Net and XXX have led us to the water: It is now up to us to drink.
Once again, I agree whole-heartedly. However, I do not see why the
private sector could not appreciate all your points and get into this
act, rather than leave it to the Physicists and (perhaps) NIH to
spell-out the doom of much of the paper literature. One of the major
publishing houses could, tomorrow, open up a secure and internationally
replicated archive and charge $100 a shot for straight deposits, $200
for peer-reviewed "authenticated" deposits, etc. Promising new advances
in "hypersearching the web" (Scientific American June 1999), will
greatly facilitate the task of sifting all this literature.
Sincerely, Donald Forsdyke. Discussion Leader. Bionet.journals.note