tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post6601889923272572204..comments2024-03-27T19:58:17.387-05:00Comments on Computational Complexity: The Journal ManifestoLance Fortnowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06752030912874378610noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-17944502509085885082009-10-01T18:43:08.537-05:002009-10-01T18:43:08.537-05:00we should all post our OWN stuff on websites ASAP....<i>we should all post our OWN stuff on websites ASAP. Do you object to that?<br /></i><br /><br />When it's legal, I agree that everyone should do it. However, it's generally illegal to scan in old papers and put them online.<br /><br /><i>Would you object to also adding that bibliography entries should tell people where to find links?</i><br /><br />Relatively permanent sources (arXiv, JSTOR) are great. Personal web pages are OK. Illegal repositories are a bad idea.<br /><br />However, including this in the bibliography is vastly less important than putting papers online in the first place. Once they are online, they are easy to find by web search, and the main function of the link is just to alert readers that the paper is online.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-53546662265468425682009-10-01T14:51:24.102-05:002009-10-01T14:51:24.102-05:00To the last ANON comment:
In the next post Daniel
...To the last ANON comment:<br />In the next post Daniel<br />Lemire proposes a more modest version: we should all post our OWN stuff on websites ASAP. Do you object to that?<br />Would you object to also adding that bibliography entries should tell people where to find links?<br /><br />These questions are NOT rhetorical- my post was an attempt to see PROS and CONS of this and what to do next- how to modify (as my next post did, and which Daniel did even more).Bill Gasarchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-75952354424361597712009-10-01T09:52:42.414-05:002009-10-01T09:52:42.414-05:00This is (in part) an absolutely terrible idea, act...This is (in part) an absolutely terrible idea, actively harmful for the cause. Some of us are trying to deal seriously with publishers, government agencies, professional societies, and university administrations, more or less none of whom are sympathetic to the "information wants to be free, copyright sucks" approach. Coming across as a bunch of nutcases who cheerfully violate the law doesn't help.<br /><br />The cardinal rule is that you should take responsibility for your own actions as a scholar. If you don't want to give away all your rights, then don't give them away. Either pick a different publisher, or ask for different terms (you'd be surprised at how often a clearly defined, reasonable modification is accepted). If you do give up your rights, don't expect a lot of sympathy when you whine about how you really wanted to publish in that venue and how unfair it is that you have to choose between respecting your principles and optimizing your career.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-43203191016103700062009-09-30T21:35:15.199-05:002009-09-30T21:35:15.199-05:00I think 1, 3, 5 and 6 are technically copyright vi...I think 1, 3, 5 and 6 are technically copyright violations unless specifically authorized by the transfer of copyright contract. Publishers are presumably scared of triggering a boycott and hence don't enforce these contracts, but (5) seems like asking for trouble.<br /><br />In my opinion the best long-term solution is for NSF to:<br />(i) Require NSF funded research to be published in open-access venues (as NIH does now)<br />(ii) Prohibit mention of work that isn't publicly available in grant applications, whether NSF funded or not. (Works predating this policy would be grandfathered of course.)Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01106301822827737278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-30511865888854875492009-09-30T18:25:22.568-05:002009-09-30T18:25:22.568-05:00I read that as self-advertisement
There's als...<i>I read that as self-advertisement</i><br /><br />There's also the altruistic motivation of facilitating the spread of knowledge.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-2088304401459406782009-09-30T18:19:58.689-05:002009-09-30T18:19:58.689-05:00Illegal, maybe, but not wrong. Whose interests do...Illegal, maybe, but not wrong. Whose interests does respecting copyright in these cases serve?<br /><br />People generally assume that it's moral to follow laws, because they think of "illegal" as things like theft and murder. But copyright laws aren't the Ten Commandments, and in their modern form have been mostly written by companies like Disney. I think that violating copyright laws in order to facilitate scientific discussion is net beneficial to society.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-49399465172449482872009-09-30T18:02:36.904-05:002009-09-30T18:02:36.904-05:00While I agree on most measures proposed, I am quit...While I agree on most measures proposed, I am quite surprised to read a call to massive copyright violation. <br />Making a conscious decision to post one's papers is one thing (I read that as self-advertisement), circumventing copyright protections by downloading others' papers and posting them in a public repository is flat out wrong. <br />If you strongly feel about all being free, lobby to have all proceedings available for free *legally* and boycott journals that collect a fee from readers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-89188006972880275532009-09-30T16:21:27.093-05:002009-09-30T16:21:27.093-05:00I do not know the legal status but it is a good po...I do not know the legal status but it is a good point. Alternatively,<br />YES, point to an archive AND<br />the authors website in your<br />bibliographies.<br />I could ammend the MANIFESTO to<br />``try to provide links to papers in<br />your bibliography as best you can.''<br />And this will become easier as more and more people Do post their papers on their websites and on archives.<br /><br />A bigger problem- there are people who do not do this and its not clear what to do about that?<br />In one case I wanted to point to someones papers and he did not have them on line so I set up his<br />papers-website for him, but thats just a temporary solution (I'm not going to maintain it) and only one person. Even so, you can offer to help your ludite colleagues.Bill Gasarchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-44383619289089435912009-09-30T16:11:44.015-05:002009-09-30T16:11:44.015-05:00FOCS 2009 pdfs are here. As Anon3 pointed out, 12 ...FOCS 2009 pdfs are <a href="http://graph-theory.blogspot.com/2009/07/focs-2009-accepted-papers-with-pdf.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. As Anon3 pointed out, 12 papers are missing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-17290027084696953132009-09-30T15:58:54.036-05:002009-09-30T15:58:54.036-05:00Posting a paper on ones personal website is the be...Posting a paper on ones personal website is the best option -- and is often the first place people search for it, and the easiest way for people to find it.<br />ECCC is also a very good option for complexity, and the ArXiv is good as well (except for the known P=NP papers problem).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-16339442265117164252009-09-30T12:43:34.661-05:002009-09-30T12:43:34.661-05:00I agree with these suggestions, except 5 and possi...I agree with these suggestions, except 5 and possibly 6. It is nice that most of the community agrees as well, although many people are still not using the arXiv. (Hosting a paper on your personal website is not a substitute, unless you can commit to hosting it for the next hundred years.) <br /><br />For FOCS 2009, the final versions were due about seven weeks ago. A list of papers with links is at http://graph-theory.blogspot.com/2009/07/focs-2009-accepted-papers-with-pdf.html There are still twelve papers that do not have online versions that Google can find: <br /><br />Fully Dynamic $(2 + \eps)$ Approximate All-Pairs Shortest Paths with $O(\log \log n)$ Query and Close to Linear Update Time<br /><br />A $(\log n)^{\Omega(1)}$ integrality gap for the Sparsest Cut SDP<br /><br />Learning Decision Trees From Random Examples: a Smoothed Analysis<br /><br />Exact And Approximate Pattern Matching In The Streaming Model<br /><br />One bit encryption is complete<br /><br />The Communication Complexity of Set-Disjointness with Small Sets and 0-1 Intersection<br /><br />The Intersection of Two Halfspaces Has High Threshold Degree<br /><br />Extracting Correlations<br /><br />The Data Stream Space Complexity of Cascaded Norms<br /><br />Agnostic Learning of Monomials by Halfspaces is Hard<br /><br />Models for the compressible Web<br /><br />2-Source Extractors Under Computational Assumptions and Cryptography with Defective RandomnessAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-71825469761606094802009-09-30T12:18:30.272-05:002009-09-30T12:18:30.272-05:00I can sign onto that.
Re including links to free ...I can sign onto that.<br /><br />Re including links to free copies of papers: I think links of the form arXiv:nnnn.nnnn are far preferable to http links, because web sites often go stale and then it can be difficult to find the papers. And commercial journal publishers often remove these links as part of their copyediting process. But in general I think this is still a good idea, especially in the copies of the papers you have control over.<br /><br />But it's also important to make sure that the version you have freely available online is up-to-date. If you make some changes as part of the journal revision process, make them in the arxiv copy too before signing over the copyright. Otherwise people who refer to the unfree version won't get the benefit of your revisions.D. Eppsteinhttp://11011110.livejournal.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-32420973525798339962009-09-30T12:01:45.902-05:002009-09-30T12:01:45.902-05:00Are (5), (6) legal? Can I really download arbitrar...Are (5), (6) legal? Can I really download arbitrary papers from Springer (using my school's access) and post them publicly on my website?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com