Monopolies in science take a silly form: monopolies without money. Such monopolization breaks world economy “effectively”.
👉 See this article summarized in a short and humorous post.
- In business there is only one kind of a monopoly: Does Economy high valued, rich enterprise that controls a sector of a market. Well, this kind has subkinds: natural monopoly (a business holding some network that can function well only when entirely controlled by one entity, e.g., utilities, railways), legal monopolies (arising from a legal barrier for other businesses to enter, such as a patent), collusion monopolies, etc. But the common thing for all of them is that never business monopolies are poor. (Well, almost never: A patent owner may still be poor.)
- In science monopolies also exist, but they are often different than common business monopolies:
- Every scientist or a science collective is a monopolist, because a discovery can have only one author or one collective of authors (unless the discovery is challenged by more than one author discovering it at nearly same time). This simply attaches the author’s name to a published work.
- But yet another kind of monopoly in science arises out of selfishness and tradition: Because of selfishness of others, usually only the author can publish his discoveries, even if he/she gave the right to publish (such as through a Creative Commons license). Selfishness: People usually don’t want on publishing others’ works for free. Tradition: Publishers accept only submissions from the author.
- This makes the author a monopolist, often a monopolist without money. This may be a monopoly of an important discovery, blocking development of much of science (especially if the author has no money to publish on him/her own).
- This project provides marketing money for the authors. But this is a temporary solution: We need to create the occupation of science marketers, and they receive the money for marketing.
- So, science ethics, namely the custom of accepting submissions only from the author, is immoral, because it effectively blocks development of science.
To overcome the silly system of monopolies, donate to AIIM (AI Internet-Meritocracy) app.
👉 Help fund the next public test of AIIM.
Help Test a New Way to Fund Science
AI Internet-Meritocracy (AIIM) is an operational beta designed to allocate available donations to researchers and open-source developers using AI-assisted evaluation of documented contributions. Payment transactions are already recorded on-chain.
The next major evidence milestone is a proposed five-month public adversarial test of the allocation model, with $1,000 distributed to eligible funding recipients. Donations help pay for the development, infrastructure, reviewer and participant recruitment, outreach, and operating work needed to reach and evaluate that milestone.
You do not need to assume AIIM is already proven to support the project. Your donation helps turn the proposal into evidence: what works, what fails, and what should change.
Support the next testing milestone → Read the test proposal →
Independent review
Researchers and technical reviewers: independent criticism is welcome, including negative conclusions. Review AIIM’s assumptions, governance, failure modes, and testing plan →
Research status: AIIM remains experimental. AI-generated evaluations can contain factual errors or biases, and decentralized governance and non-custodial components remain under development. That uncertainty is why public testing, auditability, and external criticism are central to the project.
I would like to thnkx for the efforts you have put in writing this blog. I am hoping the same high-grade blog post from you in the upcoming as well. In fact your creative writing abilities has inspired me to get my own blog now. Really the blogging is spreading its wings quickly. Your write up is a good example of it.