GitHub and ArXiv and Jupyter for Scientific Papers

Question

I am a university student who has never published, but I read papers quite frequently. Through my institution, I also have access to for-profit journals. As far as I know, researchers in Medicine and Chemistry often publish in such journals, partly because studies based on data rely on institutional quality control and trusted peer reviewing.My proposition is a platform based on Git that is supposed to be used to share independent science papers and thus combat the typically extortionate pricing for journal access. The site should extend the feature set of arXiv by hosting the paper as well as all the primary data, assuming the data is somewhat moderate in size. The website would re-evaluate your code and display the result every time you push updates to it. Additionally, the site would have a discussion section and pull-request-like functionality.If you are a scientist who has published before, I wonder if you consider this a useful idea?

gus_massa · Accepted Answer

On one hand, it would be nice because it's annoying to read papers with a high level description of the method but no raw data or source code, so I have to guess the details, and sometimes the most important part is hidden in the details. In computer science there are some requests for source code / docker, but in other ares it's uncommon.
> and thus combat the typically extortionate pricing for journal access
On the other hand, the main problem is how to evaluate researchers and compare different areas. To make everyone not angry, the method is to count papers, just count them without reading. So Journals sell stamps.
It's actually not so simple, because there are bad journals, so there is impact index, citations, h-index, lost of good and bad journals, number of pages, and in some cases evaluators even read the papers.
So it will be very difficult to get/keep a research position if someone publish only in your site (or only in arXiv).