You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Older societies thus have the financial conflict of depending on subscription revenue for present operations. Very difficult to convince them to abandon that, and very hard to wean them even if they agree. That's another reason to support the end-run open access route: preprints.
Ultimately, though, you want money to be supporting the best new models (and successor models, when those are found). And so far we haven't found a really good decentralized way to support preprints and whatever better models come after preprints.
The arXiv budget last year was ~$2mil. The American Physical Society's journal budget was ~$40mil. In terms of the social benefit I think that's inverse from where it should be. So: what would a good market structure look like, one where arXiv naturally outcompeted the APS?
Note: I'm really reluctant to want a model where the arXiv is simply locked in by central fiat. Better models than arXiv are certainly possible, and it'd be nice to encourage the emergence of those as well.
Excuse me: the APS's journal _revenue_ (not budget - expenses were about 30 mill, so their profit was about 5 times the arXiv's entire budget).
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
