Post #2246347
2026-02-05 16:46 UTC
@aeryn_thrace@mastodon.social The fact that papers are used to measure researchers against each other for career advancement seems like a big obstacle to the necessary changes you describe, unfortunately.
I agree with you that an actionable and collective "knowledge system" is better than a pile of PDFs, but a bigger reform of how academia functions might be required first.
Replies (1)
-
@aeryn_thrace@mastodon.social 2026-02-05 20:24
@Guillawme@fediscience.org No doubt it's required. 2 points about the current system: 1. It hasn't been around for that long. It's easy to thing that this is the way things have always been but they haven't. I went to school with people who got tenure track positions with one paper (early 2000s). 2. It's not sustainable, and is already showing cracks: exponential growth of predatory publishers and A.I. generated papers. And that's not even considering the reproducibility crisis. >>