Here is my hot take. Strictly speaking for APS, this funding model does not seem to be a big deal. If you are an active physicist in research, you are very likely to be part of an institution that has a subscription to the journals (university or national labs). If you are not an active physicist in research, the papers are probably prohibitively incomprehensible to you. I also think it makes sense for a society to publish journals. Societies facilitate the communication of research progress. This is clearly one of the goals of conferences. Papers in journals are usually a better format for communicating advances (more detail, can refer back to it at your leisure, peer reviewed, etc)
I think a lot of this depend on the field and context. For example in physics there are a lot of commercially available simulation tools that help with analysis of an experiment. You of course describe the approach and setup of the simulation but you can not publish/reference the source code since you are just a licensee.
The society is a network of researchers with like interests. Political lobbying is also important for a lot of academic societies (like APS).
I find it interesting that you are advocating the removal of a current capitalistic/greedy funding model and replacing it with...another capitalistic/advertising model.
That post doesn't advocate for a new model; it just points out possible deficiencies in current conceptions.
>The society is a network of researchers with like interests.
So, the added value is for the researchers in the network, but that value is subsidized by the "payers", who are not the researchers?
>Open access publishing threatens this subscription model. If paid library subscriptions disappear entirely, a new payer or payers will need to be found.
>BTW, because of the way Amazon’s FBA service works, even ordering items that are “sold by” a reputable retailer but “fulfilled by Amazon” gets you a high chance of receiving a fake. This is because they mix FBA stock and don’t discriminate what stock it comes from when filling that item, regardless of who the seller is.
Is this also true with items sold directly by Amazon?
Not true. Sellers can prevent comingling inventory by creating their listing with a unique FNSKU. This doesn't prevent the product from being sold on the same ASIN. If sellers can do that then Amazon can absolutely do that.
If you sell anything on Amazon and get items back from FBA before they hike up prices near the holidays you will see items returned which were not what you shipped...books for example.
I strive to layout daily goals in the morning and then reflect on the day in the evening. Lately it has been difficult to consistently layout goals in the morning, so the evening portion has morphed into reflection on the day and planning what to do the next day. I will also occasionally update monthly and yearly goals if necessary. It has been a great benefit for me to be able to go back and see what I was occupied with at a given time and be able to put my current situation into perspective.
Artificial and natural is probably not the best terminology to use [0]. What is true is that this will almost certainly contain enrichment of one or more isotopes (NASA uses Pu-238 for some of their missions).
See Inertial Confinement Fusion, The NIF, High-Energy-Density Physics, etc.