posted on Jul, 23 2019 @ 04:06 PM
KEY NOTE - EVERYTHING discussed in here is in reference to tax payer funded research - it is/should ALL be owned by the citizens upon completion but
an "intelligentsia mafia" is making BILLIONS on hoarding and selling this data to the public
This is long,I'm sorry, but it's a complex topic that I've been dealing with for 20+ years and it's gotten progressively worse by magnitudes the
last 10 years. It is maybe the most important issue facing research institution in the world & deals with gate keepers of "new knowledge" keeping
it for only those they deem worthy - creating monopolies of their choosing - which can explain our current Tech giants.
This is a MAJOR issue when it comes to people being able to access research published in journals, or just published research papers, like
dissertations, doctoral thesis's and other research papers. If a person's tuition/college is paid for by a federal grant, their research is
considered public once they publish for their degree/graduation. Then there are specific research universities that get BILLIONS per year (I've seen
as much as $30 billion per year in university research being spent, at times it's more or less). This could be in computers, electronics, bio-tech,
pharmacology, computer science/security, physics, ANYTHING. The university gets $$ to pay their professors & assistants as well as buy their
equipment (and they pay TOP DOLLAR for this equipment - it's truly insane what some of this equipment costs - it's probably only second to
parts/supplies in the Military/DOD as far as price markups - and they have to use a few specialized companies - there's about 3-5 main companies for
SO when the research is finished, the researchers loose the rights to the "gains" from that research and it goes to the university who can sell
patents (another scam b/c the Gov paid for this knowledge). Then the papers HAVE to be published in journals. Papers can be anywhere form 4-5 pages
up to 100+ pages, not many are longer than that unless it is a VERY long, decade long study.
The author chooses the journal in which to publish, if it will be acceptable, some are more prestigious, some are more accessible (like all major
universities have access vs only a select few - maybe 20-50 uni's/colleges), so they have to decide who get's there research and that really effects
who sees the results of this data.
These journals then claim publishing rights to the papers and they allow access to these online from ~$38 to over $1000 for a single paper, which
they didn't have to buy or do anything for.
Now the kicker is that some major universities, like the top ivy league universities own the journals and are gate keepers as to who can see this
data, because they have VERY difficult membership account structures to be a member. You want Computer Science and Bio Tech? Great, you have to
subscribe to ALL content at $10 million per quarter ($40 million / year) but if you want studies of asexual post gender manatees in a patriarchrially
structured lagoon, well you can buy these studies ala carte at a reasonable price of $487 per download through your university account.
Now much of the new research is not available unless you are a member of a university, but your university has to be a member of that publisher to
access these and there all kinds of limits, rules, etc. One research project could require 1,000 articles, which could cost the university over
$50,000 for that access! Some "special schools" pay a lot more but have unlimited access, to multiple publishers, and it creates a method of
"gatekeeping information" where only the elite can afford current info (less than 3-5yrs old), or it is EXTREMELY expensive.
An example of this is Wifi standards. VERY few can afford to buy access to the papers where these are being designed and as such there are thousands
of holes found over the years. Had 100,000 people read the papers when they were published, those holes woudl have been found and fixed before they
became a standard. This has happened for almost every computer 7 electronics standard for the last 40-50 years - which is why we have so many
The average joe can buy access for $25-70 per article, but much of it is many years old. They can use many sites to access this.
A man named Aaron Schwartz wrote a program while at MIT that downloaded every file accessed on their network and accumulated over 4 million articles
and he published them openly and freely on VERY little budget (less than a couple thousand dollars). He was arrested & bailed out and about a year
later "died" from suicide or a heart problem - it was totally suspicious.
Then a Russian hacker did something similar using thousands of donated passwords to sites to access the publishers whenever an article was requested.
So someone would go to their site - www.sci-hub.tw (may be different now) and enter the URL for the article it wanted, the site would log in randomly
with one of the THOUSANDS of supplied passwords (by sympathetic university staff) and download the article and store it on their server while also
passing it onto the person requesting it. So every time you use it, you are helping expand the communities knowledge if it didn't already have the
To date, they have amassed over 80 million articles, more than any single one publisher and are operating on a budget of less than a poorly paid IT
tech in eastern Europe, that includes storage & hosting in 6 countries & backups across the world (torrent files so it can never be brought down!!).
SO this shows the cost of running the LARGEST journal sight.
Now the argument that the journal companies (industry valued at $17.8-25.4 BILLION per year in revenue) make is that there are MASSIVE costs to
hosting the data, indexing all the journals, and providing access to the articles through their client portals. They also claim they have to "peer
review" which has been proven that more fake journal submissions make it through than honest ones - so when about 50 articles were submitted for
publications, 1/2 completely falsified, the other half 100% accurate, the vast majority of the false ones passed the peer review test while a large
number of the legit ones failed (not 1/2 but it said a "fair portion were found to be fraudulent while a vast majority of the fake submissions were
passed peer review for publication). So these "peer reviews" were the other major cost that are supposed to account for them charging $1000 for a
single article. Even Harvard found it could no longer afford full access to their traditional publicist (even though Harvard partially owned
So, this entire industry is a raqueet and I believe fit for a RICO investigation. On top of that, ALL data that receives even a cent of tax payer
money should be published in an open and public database immediately upon completion and BEFORE it is submitted to any other journal. Also, any
patents obtained from the research based on tax payer money should be put into some kind of trust and be over-seen by a trustee where proceeds are
returned to the education system to help pay for K-12 & colleges.