ACM Makes Thousands of Research Articles Freely Available; Opens First 50 Years

While I don't want to speculate for ACM, I do know a lot about the association space and their business models as I have reported on this space for a decade. I would suggest that in a situation like this, "paying for it" probably refers to:

- Accounting for the loss in revenue from changing a service that was once commercial (as this would be an example of a loss of a "nondues revenue," something a lot of organizations are actually trying to increase so as to cut back their reliance on membership dues)

- Potential rights considerations (there are magazine articles with photos in that archive, for example, and many of those might have contracts/ownership considerations to work through)

- The labor of actually managing the transition (with something like this you wouldn't want to just run a script to open it up, you probably would have to double-check things, and there are simply a lot of things). They have to budget for any employee work used to handle this transition.

They emphasized to me in our interview, however, that the issue was not technical; I actually thought it might be given the amount of content there is, but as they're quoted as saying in the piece, the real work centered around the creative decision-making around actually making a call like this.

Peter Naur was Danish, and was successful in getting the term datalogy established in the Scandinavian languages. Although in recent years most institutions have stopped using it in English materials and adopted "computer science", I guess for greater international visibility. For example, the department Naur established at the University of Copenhagen, the Datalogisk Institut [1], is now branded as the Department of Computer Science [2] in English. Whereas when Naur was still running it, he called it the Datalogy Institute.

[1] https://di.ku.dk/

[2] https://di.ku.dk/english/

Because they do not want you to submit their proprietary tech as an open standard. In the extreme, think about submitting .NET to ECMA. Something lighter might be a proprietary image format or interchange method. Engineers may find this useful. It may be at the request of a significant customer. It may even be in the best interest of the company. It does not mean senior management will agree though.

I meant ANSI, ITU, ISO standards committee involvement or publishing RFCs on your own time without their name attached to yours. I can understand not using their name without permission.

A submarine post for an unrelated company

Well, it seems not seeing this response in a timely manner has worked out for me as Bryan himself responded already but the joke was that he's often talked about being sidelined by doing journal study and/or obsessing over old manuals and papers. He also gave a paperswelove[0] on two papers in 2016, one of which is actually in the ACM library[1], and was involved with systemswelove[2].

Bryan, if you're reading this, I'm not a stalker. Apparently being accused of making a "submarine post" makes for a thorough reply, from me at least, even never having heard the term before.

  [0] https://paperswelove.org/2016/video/bryan-cantrill-jails-and-solaris-zones/   
  [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1052676.1052707   
  [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjVkCfgsLQ4]

incidentally, if anyone knows how to get hn to put my citations on separate lines without indenting do let me know, I tried a few different markdownisms but this was the best I could do.

Not everything. A lot. But stuff published this year still hasn't made its way there. And not all social sciences.

source: dissertating

(When I need something I can't get through my library, #icanhazpdf, find on scihub, or other googley means; I just email the author. Though that can take some time.)

In my experience, the only hole in shadow libraries is that they lack scans of old papers on non-trendy subjects. Interestingly, it seems the humanities don't have analogously useful sites.