“We are at the point now where is nothing can be accomplished until we get government out of the classroom.”
Because, news is not objective, and peer reviewed isn’t science?
Something everything should know, but they don’t?
Because have public baby siting instead of public education?
But we don’t need to the correct news, nor the best peer review, nor even
get rid public education, but we need more competition.
And as it happens, this is all occurring. And main driver has been the internet. So that’s good news [in world that is spinning out control:)].
As for our peer review, it’s basically avenue to get a job- it provides status, promotes your work. Like a form baboon hierarchy. Which is fine.
A question is what is wanted something which also about status- perhaps a much higher status.
I am not a scientist but seems Nature etc are rather insignificant, it seems there tons of scientific association which allow papers to be published- they have conferences all the time. Not political conferences- like Durban, but conferences which involve scientists relating to scientists. These are intended to be a service to scientists. Whereas Nature, etc is more of public relation type operation- or a non gadget oriented Popular Science- science theory rather than technology magazine.
It seems if one wants status, one needs a board with bunch scientists with a diversity of all the disciplines [not limited to a small board- could grow to hundreds]. I would imagine the most important aspect of such a board is to have this board activity waste the least amount of their time.
So one need to lowest “cost” in terms of the administration part- meaning having a system and/or have good administrators.
So I would say what needed is talented hard working executives. It’s more of management issue rather than a science issue.