What would be a components of an "ideal" solution? I'd love to hear improvements or corrections to my assumptions.
1) Free to view all approved papers (possibly run by a non-profit and funded by grants around the world)
2) Establish reputations for scientists (giving scientists access to future grants)
3) Peer review handled autonomously (submitted papers are automatically distributed autonomously by the system to other scientists in the related field with a high enough reputation)
4) Easy searching for articles (articles have semantic structure, are categorized by author, title, subject, citations, etc.)
5) Removal of "scientific silos" (all articles published to the same site, categories define content rather than publishing brand)
1) There already exist many platforms where one can freely view peer reviewed papers. The main problem is that only a small section of researchers submit their work there.
2) This, I think, is the crux. We should move away from using journal names as a proxy for quality (which, luckily, is an explicit goal of Plan S), and find an alternative. Altmetrics is an example of a company that attempts to establish one such alternative, I'm part of a project that attempts another.
3) This would be nice, but I don't think that's be necessary for making them open access? Given how conservative much of academia appears to be, I'm not sure if this would actually make a transition more likely.
4) Metadata for research is often already really good, also for Open Access research. Finding the actual article itself usually is the main challenge, but the only reason for that is because those articles can be behind a paywall. With them freely available, discovery is practically solved.
5) This too should be fixed if all research is published under an open license such as CC-By, which would allow everybody to mirror articles. (Like this project does: https://oalibrary.org/)
1) Free to view all approved papers (possibly run by a non-profit and funded by grants around the world)
2) Establish reputations for scientists (giving scientists access to future grants)
3) Peer review handled autonomously (submitted papers are automatically distributed autonomously by the system to other scientists in the related field with a high enough reputation)
4) Easy searching for articles (articles have semantic structure, are categorized by author, title, subject, citations, etc.)
5) Removal of "scientific silos" (all articles published to the same site, categories define content rather than publishing brand)