The opposite of ‘open’ isn’t closed. The opposite of open is broken.

Every scientist would like to be able to move through research faster, to spend less time and money acquiring material or disseminating it.

Knowledge is a public good and increases in value as the number of people possessing it increases.

The opposite of ‘open’ isn’t closed. The opposite of open is broken.

I'm proposing … that we reach into our bodies and we grab the genotype, and we reach into the medical system and we grab our records, and we use it to build something together.

Naked and pure is the spirit that transcends the existence mediocre.

If a scientist is reading a paper online and clicks through to purchase material, there's value there. It might be a business model; it might be enough to defray the cost of open access. I just want to create the infrastructure that makes movement and sharing easier.