<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Banff Protocol</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/</link>
	<description>Dedicated to the mathematical arts.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Hank</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/#comment-37950</link>
		<dc:creator>Hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 18:11:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/#comment-37950</guid>
		<description>I could produce a lot cost journal easily if I wanted to get into the magazine business.   Advertising.  Science/math people are not wealthy per se but we are all 'thought leaders' in the minds of companies doing branding and selling products.  People will pay for that.

Physical journals have value because, to many, a shelf full of reference work is easier to navigate than online bookmarks and tags, which are arbitrary depending on the mood and the day.  

For people who don't think journals are necessary, you could all form a coalition, a common site, where everyone posts their work and it can be found with a search function.

We have that at sb with general science and once you get a hundred writers or so the value to people doing the searching goes up a lot because they can find the answers in one location.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I could produce a lot cost journal easily if I wanted to get into the magazine business.   Advertising.  Science/math people are not wealthy per se but we are all &#8216;thought leaders&#8217; in the minds of companies doing branding and selling products.  People will pay for that.</p>
<p>Physical journals have value because, to many, a shelf full of reference work is easier to navigate than online bookmarks and tags, which are arbitrary depending on the mood and the day.  </p>
<p>For people who don&#8217;t think journals are necessary, you could all form a coalition, a common site, where everyone posts their work and it can be found with a search function.</p>
<p>We have that at sb with general science and once you get a hundred writers or so the value to people doing the searching goes up a lot because they can find the answers in one location.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John C. Baez</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/#comment-37786</link>
		<dc:creator>John C. Baez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 05:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/#comment-37786</guid>
		<description>Walt wrote:

&lt;blockquote&gt;

When mathematicians allowed ownership of these brands to pass into the hands of the publishers, they were suckers. Rubes. Marks who got scammed. They let the one thing of irreplaceable value to get away.

&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I agree completely.  Here's the big question: how can us suckers get it back, now that we've wised up?

The arXiv was a good move.  What's next?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Walt wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When mathematicians allowed ownership of these brands to pass into the hands of the publishers, they were suckers. Rubes. Marks who got scammed. They let the one thing of irreplaceable value to get away.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I agree completely.  Here&#8217;s the big question: how can us suckers get it back, now that we&#8217;ve wised up?</p>
<p>The arXiv was a good move.  What&#8217;s next?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Greinecker</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/#comment-37357</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Greinecker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2007 20:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2007/05/17/banff-protocol/#comment-37357</guid>
		<description>Economist Ted Bergstrom has a nice page on &lt;a href="http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/%7Etedb/Journals/jpricing.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;journal pricing&lt;/a&gt;. The "realist view" is wrong, both theoretically and empirically. Journals (at least in economics) by commercial publishers are &lt;a href="http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/%7Etedb/Journals/pricing.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;much more expensive&lt;/a&gt; than ones by professional societies. The theoretical reason for the high price of journals is nicely illustrated in the &lt;a href="http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/%7Etedb/Journals/anarchists.pdf" rel="nofollow"&gt;parable of the anarchists' annual meeting.&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Economist Ted Bergstrom has a nice page on <a href="http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/%7Etedb/Journals/jpricing.html" rel="nofollow">journal pricing</a>. The &#8220;realist view&#8221; is wrong, both theoretically and empirically. Journals (at least in economics) by commercial publishers are <a href="http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/%7Etedb/Journals/pricing.html" rel="nofollow">much more expensive</a> than ones by professional societies. The theoretical reason for the high price of journals is nicely illustrated in the <a href="http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/%7Etedb/Journals/anarchists.pdf" rel="nofollow">parable of the anarchists&#8217; annual meeting.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
