Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: SkyeLab Jul 8 2005, 01:02 PM

Hi Folks, try and track down a copy of the latest Nature, I think you will like it........
Brian

( Volume 436 Number 7047, pp 1-150)

http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/marsrover/index.html

edited to provide link....

Posted by: Bob Shaw Jul 8 2005, 01:53 PM

Nature has 'exclusive' mosaics in an image gallery which may seem rather like old hat to regular readers of this forum - thanks to the sterling efforts of our imagemeisters!

Thanks, guys!

Posted by: djellison Jul 8 2005, 01:54 PM

Can you just buy an edition of Nature?

I think having exclusivity on mosaics is a bit of a stretch of the imagination - we'll have done them ourselves in a few weeks/months

Doug

Posted by: Bob Shaw Jul 8 2005, 01:55 PM

I think Borders carries it, perhaps some other serious booksellers. I've never seen it on the shelves at WH Smiths.

Posted by: djellison Jul 8 2005, 02:13 PM

I just discovered that the collective IQ of the Borders staff here in Leicester is about 7

However - they HAVE carried it in the past - so I'll give it a week and see what happens

Doug

Posted by: SkyeLab Jul 8 2005, 02:25 PM

Doug,

You might be able to purchase from Nature directly, they have an email enquiry form type thingy. Alternatively, Nature should at least be able to give you a list of vendors in your area.

Brian

Posted by: ilbasso Jul 8 2005, 02:59 PM

Hey, can I infer from all these papers that the rovers do something other than take pretty pictures all day long?

Posted by: djellison Jul 8 2005, 03:07 PM

Occasionally

Doug

Posted by: Nix Jul 8 2005, 03:09 PM

The cost of one article is $30?

I would take an subscription but I'm only going to read MARS...

Posted by: Tman Jul 8 2005, 03:25 PM

Hey Nico, perhaps you should close a deal with Nature... give them your panoramas and get for it their articles from Mars But that would be too cheap for Nature!

Posted by: jaredGalen Jul 8 2005, 03:31 PM

"Mars Exploration: It's not rover yet"

It's dubious at best but I like it.

Posted by: RGClark Jul 8 2005, 03:32 PM

Any university library would have it though it may take up to a week for it to arrive.

Bob C.

Posted by: Bob Shaw Jul 8 2005, 03:33 PM

Doug:

They possible thought it was *another* type of (ahem) 'Nature Studies' publication you were seeking!

Bob Shaw

Posted by: Nix Jul 8 2005, 05:06 PM

Now there's an idea Tman! I'll contact them immediately...
Too cheap though? I'm not worthy! I'm not worthy!

I also hope to get a copy via the local university...

Posted by: Nix Jul 8 2005, 05:07 PM

I promise I will do something about my drinking problem

Posted by: ktotam Jul 13 2005, 10:23 PM

I can send pdfs of articles if anyone's interested..

Posted by: Nix Jul 13 2005, 10:34 PM

you can?

Nico

Posted by: ktotam Jul 13 2005, 10:48 PM

let's talk about it over an email..)

Posted by: hubdel11 Jul 16 2005, 12:04 PM

yes yes yes

Posted by: djellison Jul 16 2005, 12:14 PM

I'm not going to get all draconian - but technically I think it's breaching some copyright of Nature's to do so.

By all means talk about it via email ( I have - they're great ) but not here

Doug

Posted by: Of counsel Jul 16 2005, 05:16 PM

No doubt about that one! I suspect that Nature may have already been in touch with you. Many publications take enforement very seriously.

Posted by: tty Jul 16 2005, 05:43 PM

Sadly true, though trying to impede the dissemination of scientific results is a very unethical thing to do, particularily for a journal like Nature.
This is a case where I think we can "break the law" with a completely clear conscience.

tty

Posted by: mike Jul 16 2005, 07:40 PM

The problem is that every magazine needs to make money to continue to exist. Are writers themselves reimbursed for submissions to Nature as well? If so, they would also be in trouble if everyone just copied the original articles without any reimbursement to Nature.. regardless, though, without the magazine there would be no articles.

You can say capitalism is evil if you want, but thus far no one has come up with a better way of making people actually do something. Besides, if any of the articles in Nature had revealed anything truly amazing, we'd have heard about it already.

Posted by: TheChemist Jul 16 2005, 10:10 PM

The authors neither pay nor get paid. Publishing is in their job description

Nature earns money from subscriptions by organizations/companies/universities,
and from advertisements (in print and on the web).

We need a "science napster", I tell ya

Posted by: mike Jul 17 2005, 06:49 AM

I suppose just being published is enough, since you can put it on your resume..

Regardless, the editing staff needs to be paid, and the distribution staff, and the publishing staff, and the marketing staff, and whatever other departments I missed..

Honestly though I do download copyrighted things (no wait, I'm joking!, sorry RIAA/MPAA/whoever else), but I always buy them eventually if they're good. When I'm rich I'll buy everything and everyone will be happy.

When it comes to the written word, though, it somehow seems more unfair to 'pirate' it. I guess I personally just have more respect for writers than musicians and directors/actors/etc (although movies are written, but screenplay writers have it easy, and oh yeah, music lyrics, which technically make no sense 99% of the time).

Posted by: dvandorn Jul 17 2005, 09:25 AM

OK, so let's see, I write to Nature and ask to purchase a copy to read the early MER findings.

They write back, telling me I need to buy a year's subscription.

I try to buy a year's subscription, and they tell me that they are an industry-specific publication, and I must *prove* that I am in a field that requires a subscription to their magazine...

I don't know for sure that Nature would follow this policy, but I *do* know that AW&ST does. As do several other periodicals that publish results from NASA probes.

Tell me I'm doing something unethical trying to get access to something that *I have paid for* (with my taxes) when the publishers, when I offer them money, refuse on the grounds that I don't buy the products their advertisers are advertising... at that point, I say that the publishers are acting unethically and any distribution "behind their backs" is not only justified, they asked for it...

-the other Doug

Posted by: tedstryk Jul 17 2005, 12:45 PM

The problem is that Nature and many other journals don't get any of that funding. So someone has to pay for the production.

Posted by: djellison Jul 17 2005, 03:41 PM

In the old days pre-internet, I could understand the need to somehow cover the costs of publishing to print, but now the costs are negligable via the internet. Going on the comparatively high per-unit-cost of bandwidth on this host - a 2mb pdf is the equiv of around 1.5p

It is about time that more was done in this mould - http://themarsjournal.org/

In this modern information age - it is totally wrong for scientific information to be hidden inside expensive journals instead of shared publicly.

Doug

Posted by: tty Jul 17 2005, 05:39 PM

Actually many scientific journals now have "page charges" i e You have to pay to get published. I don't think Nature does bot I'm not sure, never having published anything in it. Nature does permit putting a PDF version of a paper freely online, but only 6 months after publication.

There are already a number of "science napsters", however it is not just a matter of publishing just anywhere. Career-wise it is unfortunately at least as important where you publish as what you publish. And on the whole Nature and Science in that order are the two most prestigious places.

tty

Posted by: TheChemist Jul 17 2005, 06:02 PM

tty,

Page charges in the era of electronic publishing is outrageous. This was done more to keep scientists from writing lengthy papers than get profit, and it was understandable when journals were produced in print. Now it is plain stupid.

The whole revolution of electronic science publishing has just started, so I hope things will sort out. Scientific journal publishing has to completely transform in the electronic era, and I hope the scientists themselves will contribute. Printed editions are a thing of the past and unnecessary. I have not been to the library to actually read an article for 8 years now. It's a total waste of paper.

I understand Science and Nature are important, but ... this is such a huge subject that I will defer from continuing the discussion now. I have to go home