Dean Landolt

I’ve never quite understood academia, particularly the ins and outs of how money changes hands. But alas, for reasons unknown, I’m still compelled to become part of this tribally backward community. The one thing I do grasp is that reputation is the very pulse that drives this economy of dunces, particularly with respect to publishing. I came across a great piece by Scott Aaronson with a great analogy of just how ridiculous these journals are…

I have an ingenious idea for a company. My company will be in the business of selling computer games. But, unlike other computer game companies, mine will never have to hire a single programmer, game designer, or graphic artist. Instead I’ll simply find people who know how to make games, and ask them to donate their games to me. Naturally, anyone generous enough to donate a game will immediately relinquish all further rights to it. From then on, I alone will be the copyright-holder, distributor, and collector of royalties. This is not to say, however, that I’ll provide no “value-added.” My company will be the one that packages the games in 25-cent cardboard boxes, then resells the boxes for up to $300 apiece.

But why would developers donate their games to me? Because they’ll need my seal of approval. I’ll convince developers that, if a game isn’t distributed by my company, then the game doesn’t “count” — indeed, barely even exists — and all their labor on it has been in vain.

Admittedly, for the scheme to work, my seal of approval will have to mean something. So before putting it on a game, I’ll first send the game out to a team of experts who will test it, debug it, and recommend changes. But will I pay the experts for that service? Not at all: as the final cherry atop my chutzpah sundae, I’ll tell the experts that it’s their professional duty to evaluate, test, and debug my games for free!

On reflection, perhaps no game developer would be gullible enough to fall for my scheme. I need a community that has a higher tolerance for the ridiculous — a community that, even after my operation is unmasked, will study it and hold meetings, but not “rush to judgment” by dissociating itself from me. But who on Earth could possibly be so paralyzed by indecision, so averse to change, so immune to common sense?

I’ve got it: academics!

It goes on from there, but suggests academics, scientists specifically, “seem prone to a peculiar anger deficiency” — a hypothesis which strikes me as a particularly fun one to test. Is “muster[ing] a level of anger commensurate with what’s happening” really what’s needed to correct this wayward system? I would like to think academia itself would be rife with ideas for alternatives. The way I figure it, the only value-added the publishers bring is reputation, but couldn’t this be handled in a more open, free and federated manner?

This entry was posted Thursday, April 26th, 2007 at 3:40 pm and is filed under Reputation, Academia. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.