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
79
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://www.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
A、theservantsofGodtoenterheavenB、thepeopleonearthtohavealookatthemagnificentsightinitC、peopleonotherstar
Asalways,IampleasedtobehereattheNationalPressClubformy【L1】______Speech.ThisistheseventhtimeIhavehadthe【L2
A、正确B、错误B特定信息的找寻和判断。根据原文Mr.Hooper,Ihavebeenwiththiscompanynowforsevenyears可知某人在向Mr.Hooper陈述已在公司工作了七年这一事实。由此可见题干的说法与原
Whichofthefollowingcanbestdescribeherpersonality?
A、Becausethosewomen’svoicessoundlikemenB、Becauseawomanwouldcomparehervoicetothatoftheotherfemalespeakers.C、
LifeLessonsTravelHasTaughtMeVocabularyandExpressionshustleandbustlecatalystDepravedphilosophize
GoldRushinCaliforniaVocabularyandExpressionsnuggetsawmillfinancierBenjaminBuckleywasnotoneoftheluckyb
ThebadeffectsoftrafficjamsincludethefollowingEXCEPT______.
Whyaretravelersexperiencingmorestressthaneverastheycheckinattheairport?
Companieshavebeguntocreateenvironment-friendlywatercontainers.
随机试题
在()的期间内,与内幕信息知情人员联络、接触,从事或明示、暗示他人从事与该内幕信息相关的证券交易,交易行为异常且无正当理由或者正当信息来源的人员,属于非法获取证券、期货交易内幕信息的人员。
冲突双方以放弃部分利益为前提,在一定程度上满足对方的部分需要,达成彼此接受的协议,此解决方法是
男性,18岁。反复午后发热1个月,体温在37.3~37.8℃,疲乏无力,消瘦。近1周咳嗽,偶尔咯血性痰,夜间盗汗,无胸痛、气短。外院X线检查见右锁骨上斑片状阴影,痰结核菌检查阴性。该患者最可能的诊断是
用于求解图示电路的4个方程中,有一个错误方程,这个错误方程是:
账户的基本结构包括( )。
资产负债表日至财务会计报告批准报出日之间发生的调整事项在进行调整处理时,下列不能调整的项目是()。
人们把“菜篮子工程”的成功经验概括为:想要填满“菜篮子”,必须搞好“菜园子”和“菜摊子”,只有搞好“菜园子”和“菜摊子”,才能填满“菜篮子”。这表明()。
一、注意事项1.申论考试,是对分析驾驭材料能力、解决问题能力、言语表达能力的测试。2.作答参考时限:阅读资料40分钟,作答110分钟。3.仔细阅读给定的材料,然后按申论要求依次作答,答案书写在指定的位置。二、给定资料1.“
大学生小王参加研究生入学考试,一共考了四门科目:政治、英语、专业科目一、专业科目二。政治和专业科目一的成绩之和与另外两门科目的成绩之和相等。政治和专业科目二的成绩之和大于另外两门科目的成绩之和。专业科目一的成绩比政治和英语两门科目的成绩之和还高。根据
1928年来,红军以不足一个营的兵力,打退了敌人四个团的进攻,保卫了井冈山。为此,毛泽东写下了《西江月.井冈山》,这次战斗发生的地方是()。
最新回复
(
0
)