> the issue is not a vacuous "prestige" but funding being dependent on hard metrics such as impact factor
These things are not in contention.
There is no singular problem to be solved, which is why it is so difficult. No smoking gun.
> And ArXiv is not one of them.
ArXiv has a large impact on metrics and so called impact factor. But let's also not be delusional to the fact that a paper from a prestigious institution will always receive more citations (or any other metric) than an equal quality paper from a less prestigious institution. All our metrics can be hacked through publicity.
> Reading your post
Reading yours, it sounds like you stand in the way of resolving issues in academia. Not because you don't have issues with it that you want to solve, but because you have already found the answer.
Your comment reads like someone who has a relationship with academia.
There is no singular problem to be solved, which is why it is so difficult. No smoking gun.
ArXiv has a large impact on metrics and so called impact factor. But let's also not be delusional to the fact that a paper from a prestigious institution will always receive more citations (or any other metric) than an equal quality paper from a less prestigious institution. All our metrics can be hacked through publicity. Reading yours, it sounds like you stand in the way of resolving issues in academia. Not because you don't have issues with it that you want to solve, but because you have already found the answer.Your comment reads like someone who has a relationship with academia.