Using non-volunteer humans as experiment subjects is highly unethical, and I hope that it is illegal everywhere.
BTW, we are not eating chimps only because their food is not tasty.
From the start of this sting, I have conferred with a small group of scientists who care deeply about open access. Some say that the open-access model itself is not to blame for the poor quality control revealed by Science's investigation. If I had targeted traditional, subscription-based journals, Roos told me, "I strongly suspect you would get the same result."* But open access has multiplied that underclass of journals, and the number of papers they publish. "Everyone agrees that open-access is a good thing," Roos says. "The question is how to achieve it.
so he didn't miss it, maybe he is doing this right now, but isn't telling
I don't care how it looks, but it destroyed my workflow
I don't care how it looks, as long as it gets the job done
Yes, I love it
I don't use iOS you insensitive clod"
Link to Original Source
Well, actually probably rsync will be sufficient for your needs. And rsnapshot is probably a little more than your needs. I suppose that only thing you need to configure is a rsync server on windows, a nice writeup you will find here: http://www.stillnetstudios.com/snapshot-backups-howto/
I recently used this to configure my wife's windows PC, so that it will work with rsnapshot, and backup all her projects. After configuring rsync server on windows, the rsync operation works seamlessly. Whether you will use just rsync, or complement it with rsnapshot is up to you.
In PeerJ for example you can publish as long as you are doing reviews for PeerJ also. That seems to not conflict with your point of view, and sounds quite reasonable for me too. I feel that this is not the ultimate solution, but a step in a good direction too.
The system is broken, but few people outside university realize how badly it is broken. I did some reviews, but I prefer to not, because there is no reward, and my time is better spent on actual research. Also it happened to me once, that I recommended rejecting a paper and I worked hard to write a good review, and the paper was published nevertheless with only few things corrected. How that journal expects to have a high citation rate is beyond me. Yes I understand that the reviewers work is for free and for the sake of humanity, but the level to which it is exploited by journals is just outrageous. I feel much better developing open source software, which is also done for free and for the sake of humanity, becuase nobody exploits me doing this.
This cartel is not the only one. And more of this will happen in near future until some kind of revolution will take place. Moving toward open access is a good direction and I hope that it will take part in revolutionizing the pulication mechanisms.
Oh well, I hope that more scandalous things like this one will resurface, which will tell people that a reform is needed. And maybe something that encourages quality and not cheating will be discovered....