| << Chapter < Page | Chapter >> Page > |
In our own context, we are massive consumers of Open Access material and will be the first ones to embrace any Fee Service System that develops or support through donation any other system which is put in place. I advocate neither, but will gladly contribute to either when the time comes. For us it will simply be another incurred cost.
We are going to list our effort with ROARMAP as soon as we can compose wording which best describes what we do. We don’t exactly fit any standard educational/research model.
I have represented Camp One as a signatory on every petition which has come along and the Berlin Declaration is on the ‘Required’ reading list, right next to the full text of Alice’s Restaurant, which holds as the source testament for the MATH Not METH movement. Knowledge is Power, as the old slogan says, anything which advances the general literacy of the world is a positive thing.
Hello, I think that there are a number of reasons to move forward regardless of the fact that we do not have universal access. This issue also came up in Kim Tucker’s posting on the series. Here are a few reasons off the top of my head.
What are some of the other reasons to push forward?
Dwelling on the somewhat esoteric for a moment
OA allows current thinking to be CURRENT for everyone.
OA allows greater collaboration by greater numbers of people interested or with expertise in the topic presented
OA contributes to the general literacy of the community and with the benefits of the distribution enabled by the Highway of Light, the World has become the community.
OA knows no boundaries, whether they are Political, Territorial, or Profit Generating which while being a continuing argument against it, is a compelling reason for it.
As I a have said, and has now been repeated in other venues, Camp One exists because Open Access exist and that for us, is reason enough to fight for it.
Dare I suggest that if we take the profit out of access in the first instance, everyone will profit in the second.
Martin, thank you for the additional items. I think that they point to a larger social good. That is the good that goes beyond reducing access barriers. Do you see any arguments for “waiting” until we have more technology parity? I am wondering if there is a legitimate “digital divide” type of argument. If all of the great content is differentially available, will to allow for the global “haves” to further their economic and political advantage over the “have nots?” If that is even a possibility, how would we address it?
Notification Switch
Would you like to follow the 'The impact of open source software on education' conversation and receive update notifications?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|