首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
If there is any endeavor whose fruits should be freely available, that endeavor is surely publicly financed science. Morally, ta
If there is any endeavor whose fruits should be freely available, that endeavor is surely publicly financed science. Morally, ta
admin
2019-09-23
55
问题
If there is any endeavor whose fruits should be freely available, that endeavor is surely publicly financed science. Morally, taxpayers who wish to should be able to read about it without further expense. And science advances through cross-fertilization between projects. Barriers to that exchange slow it down.
There is a widespread feeling that the journal publishers who have mediated this exchange for the past century or more are becoming an impediment to it. One of the latest converts is the British government. Recently it announced that, the results of taxpayer-financed research would be available, free and online, for anyone to read and redistribute.
Britain’s government is not alone. Soon the European Union followed suit. In the U.S., the National Institutes of Health (NIH, the single biggest source of civilian research funds in the world) has required open-access publishing since 2008. And the Wellcome Trust, a British foundation that is the world’s second-biggest charitable source of scientific money, after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, also insists that those who receive its support should make their work available free.
Criticism of journal publishers usually boils down to two things. One is that their processes take months, when the Internet could enable them to take days. The other is that because each paper is like a mini-monopoly, which workers in the field have to read if they are to advance their own research, there is no incentive to keep the price down. The publishers thus have scientists — or, more accurately, their universities, which pay the subscriptions — in an armlock. That, combined with the fact that the raw material (manuscripts of papers) is free, leads to generous returns. In 2011, Elsevier, a large Dutch publisher, made a profit of £768 million on revenues of £2.06 billion — a margin of 37 percent. Indeed, Elsevier’s profits are thought so
egregious
by many people that 12,000 researchers have signed up to boycott the company’s journals.
Publishers do provide a service. They organize peer reviews, in which papers are criticized anonymously by experts (though those experts, like the authors of papers, are seldom paid for what they do). They also sort the scientific sheep from the goats, by deciding what gets published, and where. That gives the publishers huge power. Since researchers, administrators and grant-awarding bodies all take note of which work has got through this filtering mechanism, the competition to publish in the best journals is intense, and the system becomes self-reinforcing, increasing the value of those journals still further.
But not, perhaps, for much longer. Support has been swelling for open-access scientific publishing: doing it online, in a way that allows anyone to read papers free of charge. The movement started among scientists themselves, but governments are paying attention and asking whether they might also benefit from the change.
Much remains to be worked out. Some fear the loss of the traditional journals’ curation and verification of research. Even Sir Mark Walport, the director of the Wellcome Trust and a fierce advocate of open-access publication, worries that the newly liberated papers have ended up in different places rather than being consolidated in the way they want.
A revolution, then, has begun. Technology permits it; researchers and politicians want it. If scientific publishers are not trembling in their boots, they should be.
According to Paragraph 3, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation______.
选项
A、is a very important provider of research funding
B、argues that researchers make their findings public freely
C、has a monopoly on any research results with its financial support
D、follows the example set by the U.S. NIH
答案
A
解析
细节题。根据题干关键词定位第3段第4句,分析句子结构可知,the Wellcome Trust排在the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation之后,是世界第二大为科学研究提供资金的慈善机构,由此推断the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation也为科学研究提供资助,故选A。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/SAMO777K
本试题收录于:
CATTI二级笔译综合能力题库翻译专业资格(CATTI)分类
0
CATTI二级笔译综合能力
翻译专业资格(CATTI)
相关试题推荐
TheCommissionisexpectedtoproposeallowingpeopletochoosewhichlegaljurisdictiontheywouldcomeunder,basedontheir【L
A、正确B、错误B特定信息的找寻和判断。根据原文bythemid-1800s,fasterandcheaperrailroadsbecamemorepopularandthecanalsystemdeclined可知,运河系统
PleasureofSoloTravelVocabularyandExpressionssolotravelingsocialattitudecompanionshipcozyHowmanymajor
TheEnglishPubVocabularyandExpressionstaverndartsboardontaphardtackalehousepooltable
GoldRushinCaliforniaVocabularyandExpressionsnuggetsawmillfinancierBenjaminBuckleywasnotoneoftheluckyb
Whyaretravelersexperiencingmorestressthaneverastheycheckinattheairport?
LatinAmericanandChineseofficialshaveopenedtwodaysoftalksontradeandinvestment.ThefirstChina/LatinAmericaand
Thereportbelievesthatsomecompaniestendtofalsifyabloodtestresult.
Theaimofthetestingistoseeiftheself-drivingtechnologycanreducetransportationtimesandcostsandimproveroadsafet
It’snotthatweareafraidofseeinghimstumble,ofscribblingamustacheoverhiscareer.Sure,thenicepartofuswantsMik
随机试题
纤维束和神经
我国对CD市场的管理办法规定,CD的发行单位()
微型计算机的运算器、控制器及内存储器的总称是___________。
基础代谢率的正常波动范围是
对瘫痪病人的护理中,下列哪项措施不妥( )。
分部分项工程成本分析过程中,计算偏差和分析偏差产生的原因,需进行对比的“三算”是()。
某公司2012年年初发行在外股数为5000万股,2012年公司采用配股方式进行融资,2012年5月31日为配股除权登记日,以公司2011年12月31日的总股本5000万股为基数。每10股配3股。配股价格为每股9元。配般前20个交易日公司股票收盘价平均值为1
张仲景是东汉名医,被后世尊称为“医圣”,他的著作()中记载有“人工呼吸法”,奠定了中医治疗学的基础。
通过连接两个进程的一个打开的共享文件,可以实现进程间的数据通信。这种通信方式称为()。
注册表中保存用户设置的文件名称是( )。
最新回复
(
0
)