Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Please note this is News in Brief, and so will be a short article.
Published online 20 February 2008 | Nature 451, 879 (2008) | doi:10.1038/451879f
News in Brief
Harvard adopts opt-out open-access policy
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Please note this is News in Brief, and so will be a short article.
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
In the age of Linux, the decision of Harvard has not come a day too soon, I am sure others would follow what is Harvard's trend setting move-as usual. Transparency and open source is the hallmark of democratic system unless need to subvert it is for real public interest like Defense secrets and like. Dictators have flourished, like bacteria and pathogens, in the atmosphere of secrecy and non transparency which in evolution meant deprivation of oxygen. Greetings to Harvard, continue and enlarge such open source environment ! If you agree or do not agree with me do mail at jkshran1@gmail.com
In the age of Linux, the decision of Harvard has not come a day too soon, I am sure others would follow what is Harvard's trend setting move-as usual. Transparency and open source is the hallmark of democratic system unless need to subvert it is for real public interest like Defense secrets and like. Dictators have flourished, like bacteria and pathogens, in the atmosphere of secrecy and non transparency which in evolution meant deprivation of oxygen. Greetings to Harvard, continue and enlarge such open source environment ! If you agree or do not agree with me do mail at jksharan1@gmail.com
Fantastic. Moreover, the peer-review system is broken with top PI's getting away with publishing high impact poorly reviewed rubbish. If more non-peer-reviewed research becomes more prominent it will hardly make a difference to quality and can overall only be a good thing. I long for the day results can be posted online immediately after an internal review process, followed by online review by a worldwide audience. A secret peer-review system as the previous comment (JK Sharan) says allows dictators (big PI's) to flourish like bacteria and pathogens!
To Dr Mody: people already can publish their pre-submission manuscripts to a preprint server such as ArXiv or Nature Precedings. The exaggerated description of the peer-review process by Dr Sharan and Dr Mody is not one that I recognize.