I have to say I feel privileged to be included in this August group. We live at a time where sooner or later you are reduced to a number, preferably a single one, that tells all about you at least in that category. It is pervasive. Not just in scholarship but in every phase of your life. Probably some of you have already had this experience but if not, I have had my “identity” stolen, so I have to go through a hoop to file my taxes and I had to spend money ($30 with each of the three credit unions, ironically later one of them was hacked to have my identity stolen again!) so it stops any hard credit checks to avoid having a loan taken out in my name. Ironically, I just found out that not only I cannot even get a credit card from places like Home depot anymore (yes I was going to some serious stuff at home, thought might as well sign up for this to get a discount..), I cant even ask for a credit limit increase to an existing credit card,. To do so, you have to unfreeze credit inquiry lock and then refreeze it by paying $30 again! Jesus, better not resurrect yourself any Easter soon - Nazarene, you will not get very far without a number. A halo will get you in quarantine for radioactive contamination… So I am actually happy about the fact that unlike in Europe, it is not a requirement with any Federal Agency in the US in grant proposals that you provide H-index or any other bibliometric indices. Gary C., who will always remain my indefatigable mentor, and who will never cease to amaze me (I quit being the editor of Anal Chim Acta after 14 years - I decided it is time to concentrate on improving my papers rather than others) knows well just like all the rest of you that neither editors nor reviewers are perfect. And it is not really possible for any Editor or reviewer to really do a good job with the huge onslaught of manuscripts. Technology made all this possible - to generate data easily - to write papers based on such data (or without any, like Chiranjeevi- copy and paste) and send them to one or more journals, simultaneously, or in succession, so it really up to technology to provide a solution. So I am seriously contemplating writing the following letter and seriously soliciting your inputs or at the very least, your reactions… Dear Google I/We would seriously like you to get into Scientific Journal Publication. You have taken a lot of trouble to create Google Scholar which is really helpful. Plus you have put in all the bibliometric calculators in there so I can rejoice every time one of my papers receive a citation, and celebrate when my H-index goes up one point (and shed green tears when I fall further behind my nearest competitor). It is pretty clear that you have all the machinery in place. The idea is we will upload our papers (whether you want to supply a template is up to you but no page limits please and no charge on color figures, videos solicited), written in standard scientific format onto your edifice. Your machines will be immediately able to detect any structural problem that needs return to the author. Quite possibly it would translate papers into English (or translate purported English into readable English - I think it is not worthwhile worrying about grammar as long as it is understandable) and return them to the author for approval. All reference would be URLs (or for really old papers that hasn’t gotten there yet, the citation without author names). At the very least the readers will have to look them up if they want to know anything about the reference. Then you will put this on your site, open access to anyone. Simultaneously you will generate keywords from the article (if the author has not supplied or if your machines find that one or more additional ones are needed/warranted). You will then notify anyone that has signed up with you expressing interests in one or more of those keywords about this newly disclosed piece of knowledge.
Now when we submit a paper, we want it to go to an Editor who is knowledgeable in the area so hopefully (s)he will know reviewers who are knowledgeable in the area. But who is more knowledgeable than you? Your first act would be to do a similarity index search and immediately put citations to 10 pblications that are most closely related to this, next to the paper. Also notify the authors of all those papers about this paper. If they would like to comment on this work, you will automatically provide a link where they can put in what they want to say. This will immediately appear under the paper. I imagine it might give bogus paper writers or simple copiers a second thought. Facebook style, anyone registered with you, can go in and “like” “so so” or “bogus” (or finer gradations, with or without comments) any of the papers or comments. As machine intelligence develops, you will be able to further flag papers that are (a) related (b) supportive or (c) contradictory to what is being said here. Initially you might also invite your first round of comment invitees to do so. Initially this will encounter strong resistance. This is a very vast money-making operation for not just commercial publishers but some learned societies as well. In the new way of things, many will miss the Editorial prestige (and the power to make or break young people’s carer) and the honor of being big society presidents and officers and so on. May be at least initially you can invite some of them to join in this enterprise if you want to (it will help formulate fine details - every discipline has some quirks - but eventually kick them out - you wouldn’t need them for very long - you can always have consultants (BTW do not forget I wrote this letter)) - not that long ago, they did not need journal income to survive and they can go back to their old chaste ways again. But this will eventually catch on. An Open Access Google Journal of Science (Nature and Science are quivering in their boots!)? Of course it will quickly subdivide into disciplines and sub-disciplines and sub-sub disciplines. But it won’t take very much effort to keep this going for a while until this catches on. Naturally you will support this from ad revenues, the ads can run along the side. All the money the universities can save through this, they can (a) spend in ads with you to recruit graduate students (b) give Professors x dollars per paper they publish in an Open Access journal - it wont be just you initially but then the others wont last in competition very long! Eventually all knowledge has a common publication place no special prestige in publishing in some special journal. You will be providing a service to science (scholarship in general) and humanity much as you are trying to do by archiving all written down human knowledge. Presently, there is not access for every person to the written word or to write a word and get it to others. I am not referring to the lack of literacy of a sizeable number of people on this planet (Bill and Melinda, if you are listening, devote some of your resources here!) but to situations when perfectly literate people cannot get their WORD out because they go against the established paradigm. This has been happening at least since Galileo’s time and keeps on being repeated in less spectacular instances continuously because some (or all) reviewers or editors that encounter their thoughts do not either think that it is important enough or even correct. Why not put it out and let time decide for itself? If some discovery has commercial value that will prove itself more readily, it will not have to depends on approvals on your site. And frankly if we pay that much attention to how many “likes” a paper gets, we would be back to how many citations H-index, G-index and so on. Then like self-citations being of lesser weight - you will have to have a clicking operations to indicate how many likes were from a coauthor, a coauthor’s coauthor, ad infinitum, related institutionally now or historically, and so on. You are all-knowing, you can do this. Meanwhile let us give everyone a chance to publish, in a manner easily accessible to all, whatever it is they want to put in print and not a select few decide what should be allowed out there. Huxley had said: If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is the man who has so much as to be out of danger? But Google, you can save us from this, because you do know everything, or at least, that is your aspiration!

Purnendu K Dasgupta Hamish Small Chair in Ion Analysis Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry The University of Texas at Arlington 700 Planetarium Place Arlington TX 76019-0065 Ph (817) 272-3806 Fax(817) 272-3808 http://www.uta.edu/chemistry/faculty/directory/Dasgupta.php https://www.uta.edu/profiles/purnendu-dasgupta Purnendu K Dasgupta Hamish Small Chair in Ion Analysis Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry The University of Texas at Arlington 700 Planetarium Place Arlington TX 76019-0065 Ph (817) 272-3806 Fax(817) 272-3808 http://www.uta.edu/chemistry/faculty/directory/Dasgupta.php https://www.uta.edu/profiles/purnendu-dasgupta