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.