On a wider point, I often see Facebook cited as an example of the 'Open Web'. However a lot of it's content is in Facebook groups, which requires a FB registration and membership to access. It's not open or publicly searchable. I can't think of a better example of the deep or hidden web. Previously a lot of that information might have ended up on more widely accessible forums.
The chart is great! Dead simple side-by-side comparison.<p>I especially like how they call out Academia and ResearchGate as for-profit companies that bombard you with emails. The open access movement needs to be not-for-profit, motivated by sharing the worlds academic discoveries with the entire world. Full stop.
An interesting related read is "On leaving Academia.edu" published by a professor who is going to leave the social networking site: <a href="https://imgur.com/NUBD8nn" rel="nofollow">https://imgur.com/NUBD8nn</a><p>Edit: the original at <a href="https://www.academia.edu/s/f0001df3b6" rel="nofollow">https://www.academia.edu/s/f0001df3b6</a> was taken down.
It's great they're going so far with it. Requiring harvesting to be allowed prevents scammy half-measures like Elsevier(?)'s scheme of letting their subscribers publish link to individual articles that might satisfy a few use cases but still allows them to shut down access whenever they like.
We have the OSI model, which allowed a great length of innovation for getting people connected, not matter which hardware both parties are using, or where they physically are.<p>Networks must be connected in order to keep moving forward, and social networks are just another type of network.