The Arxiv: Difference between revisions

|content=@mike_usher I don’t fully disagree. Let’s put it this way, the '''arxiv''' probably did more good than harm so I’ve been reluctant to discuss its issues. It is also part of a complex and that complex is the issue. It isn’t right to discuss it in isolation. It is part of an ecosystem.

I tried uploading to '''arxiv''' way back when. They told me that my email address wasn’t a current university address and I could only upload with endorsement from a university or its representative.

|content=To your question: can that Bangladeshi Genius kid get on the '''Arxiv''' if she is from some Jute farm in the delta without an endorsement?

And why if the '''Arxiv''' is open does it discriminate against the blogs of string theory critics???

|content=I grant freely that the '''arxiv''' is the absolute best part of the DISC. But it is still suppressing ideas & enforcing a caste system. It is the most progressive part of our regressive system (I was offered a full endorsement exemption from its founder Paul Ginsparg). But DISC it is.

|content=I’m enough of a hypocrite that I reserve rights to use it. But I‘ll be making demands of it too. Peter Woit is a physicist who is treated by the '''arxiv''' as an “internet personality” yet runs the most read physics blog. I demand that they fully explain their history suppressing him.

|content=Thanks for asking that question. Our goal is to save the '''Arxiv''' from being part of the DISC. Its soul is with the rebels. And Paul Ginsparg is oddly an early hero of the revolution despite my issues with the '''Arxiv''' and its administration. 🙏

But I think it is because an enormous part of the hep-th '''arxiv''' is disingenuous physics. “Sterile neutrinos from Non-commutative spacetime SUSY phenomenology over characteristic p not equal to 2.” could be a paper in a field gone mad. Or it could be a joke.

|content=Dr. Taylor, We are going to have to ask you to take your self and both of your STEM PhDs and leave this establishment. There is simply too little room left in digital memory on the '''arXiv''', so we have to be very selective. I am sure a TRUE PhD would understand.

|content=Do you wish to say something 'interesting' on the '''arXiv'''?

|content=Surely a STEM PhD outside academe doesn't need a note from his betters to post on the '''arXiv''' developed with taxpayer money?

|content=@skdh I assume we are both familiar with how some of our mutual Physics/Math PhD colleagues have been treated at '''arXiv''' for being deeply off the [[Quantum Gravity]] narrative? I think they could stop treating those people differently from everyone else.

Q: "Why avoid the '''arXiv'''? That isn't peer reviewed or even moderated! Anyone can put anything on it!"

A: "Unmoderated?? The old P. Ginsparg Los Alamos National Labs server? Who knew!"

|content=No researcher can afford to lose access to the arXiv. And no one talking openly about the actual [[Quantum Gravity]] mass delusion can have access to the journals & '''arXIv'''.