ACM Is Now Open Access

https://www.acm.org/articles/bulletins/2026/january/acm-open-access

226•leglock•2h ago

Comments

SkySkimmer•1h ago

and at the same time paywalled metadata https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/restore-fully-free-and-o...

bugglebeetle•1h ago

This is lame, but always remember that OpenAlex exists and is completely free:

https://openalex.org/works?page=1&filter=primary_location.so...

ModernMech•1h ago

This is great news and really makes me want to submit to ACM over IEEE.

rgreekguy•1h ago

They are both hosted on the same platform, which is owned by John Wiley & Sons.

ModernMech•18m ago

But IEEE is not open access entirely now too, right? Or am I misunderstanding?

elashri•1h ago

> ACM will become one of the very few organizations to offer a large, integrated, and highly curated library of articles and related artifacts openly accessible to all

Is there anything specific about them doing that? Most of the publishers are now moving to open access model (where they charge authors thousands and still not paying for reviewers) so not sure about their claim here.

thechao•1h ago

I was in academia for only a few years. I did a lot of reviewing (one of the chores for graduate students). I don't know what to say, here; there needs to be an economically based gate keeper for publication & review. Otherwise you'll get spammed by hundreds (per graduate student) of crazy-people papers. I was in a niche PL subfield (generic programming in the mid-2000s), and there was this one guy I called "guitar dude" that kept submitting PL papers using "guitar theory". The basis of the theory was an "algorithm" he developed to determine if a number was prime in O(1) (constant!!?) time in the size of the number. He was by far the most determined; he had a "swap" scam he ran to get his papers in. OTOH, submissions to the editor (my PI) numbered in the THOUSANDS, and we only had, like, 35 attendees at GPCE? I can't imagine what Nature or Science have to deal with.

I don't know how submission works for non-Western subsidized countries; but, just wading through the pre-AI submission process was a 50+-hour a week job for one, tiny, niche conference. Making the cost $1000 cuts that down by at least 2 orders of magnitude.

On the flip side ... paying the reviewers just seems like a bad idea? Reviewers need to be skeptical AF. Even the best scientists can throw out turds every now and then.

lmc•1h ago

> paying the reviewers just seems like a bad idea? Reviewers need to be skeptical AF

Sorry, it's not obvious to me - how might payment for reviewers affect their decision making?

thechao•1h ago

Let's be real: graduate students are not paid well. Even a modest payment scheme would be a dramatic boost in their income. What payment schedule would you use for review? By paper? By journal? If it's "by paper" then the students will be motivated to churn through the papers to get paid. I'm not sure what the incentive structure is there, but it doesn't sound right.

I guess the journals could turn around and pay the PI? But, then what? The "reviewers" still aren't being paid; just the PI? The incentive then is for the PI to have as many grad students as possible just reviewing papers. (FREE. MONEY.) If there was ever a dynamic I've been in where one agent doesn't need MORE power, it's the PI-grad-student one.

And, I've not even considered (in depth) the Bad Actors™ in such a situation. I'm just thinking about basic humans humaning along...

vinni2•1h ago

While it is free for readers, authors or author institutions still need to pay to publish the papers.

> Authors from institutions not participating in ACM Open will need to pay an APC to publish their papers, unless they qualify for a financial or discretionary waiver. To find out whether an APC applies to your article, please consult the list of participating institutions in ACM Open and review the APC Waivers and Discounts Policy. Keep in mind that waivers are rare and are granted based on specific criteria set by ACM.

https://cc.acm.org/2026/open-access/

random3•38m ago

Given the current trends in publishing "productivity" that may not be a bad thing.

pm90•9m ago

Is that … a bad thing? I know that peer reviewing takes time (although iirc journals don’t pay reviewers). And there is overhead around publishing which needs to be covered somehow.

colesantiago•1h ago

This is a great start, but it is not enough.

We need to keep pushing for other journals, IEEE, Springer, Elsevier, to be open access and free for all.

logifail•1h ago

I'm not sure "open access" in this context actually means, err, that the access is actually open.

emil-lp•1h ago

What do you mean? Open access means exactly what it says.

scott_s•45m ago

IEEE may do it, as it's a professional organization. That is, they're a non-profit dedicated to the furtherance of the field. Being open access fits their mission, and the costs can be handled by dues and fees. Springer and Elsevier are for-profit publishers. I don't know how if they can have an open-access business model.

jules•1h ago

This is good, but they're now charging authors a publishing fee of over $1000 per article (and they say that that is the discounted price). It is unclear whether this is justified. In my experience publishing scientific articles with ACM, all the real work (such as peer review) is done by volunteers. From what I can tell, ACM just hosts the exact PDF + metadata that authors supply. I suspect that in the future, more journals and conferences will switch to an arXiv-overlay model.

ghshephard•32m ago

I'm pretty sure the primary purpose of the $1000 is just to create some small gate to avoid overloading reviewers/ACM. There are probably other mechanisms that could be used - such as having "recommendations" for from already approved researchers - I think arXiv has something like that.

jules•30m ago

That isn't the case. Conferences organize their own website to submit articles for review. Volunteers from the conference pre-filter submitted articles for spam, the rest is handled by the review committee. There is no cost to submit. In fact, the eventual cost is often not even mentioned at that point. When the article is accepted for publication, the conference gives authors a link to an ACM website where the authors upload their PDFs. Only after that will the authors be asked to pay the fee (and if you wanted, you could refuse at that point, which presumably means that the conference will eat the loss, or maybe they'll un-publish your article).

I don't think spam is a huge issue. The conference websites and submission portals are niche and random people don't tend to find them or care enough to go through the trouble.

riazrizvi•1h ago

Finally. This might have a material impact on improving professional standards in the industry.

Here’s the actual link to content https://dl.acm.org/

zkmon•1h ago

More fodder for LLMs? I don't think humans are going to directly consume all that text.

pm90•7m ago

Most researchers publish their papers to arxiv anyway which LLMs can freely access.

scott_s•49m ago

Great news. They temporarily opened it in 2020 during the pandemic. I argued it should remain so in a post: https://www.scott-a-s.com/acm-digital-library-should-remain-.... I'm glad it's finally happened.

theodpHN•43m ago

As noted above, 'Fully Open Access' does not mean completely free. So, while this change is welcome, there are still a lot of pricing/licensing options:

Corporate https://libraries.acm.org/subscriptions-access/corporate-pri...

Government https://libraries.acm.org/subscriptions-access/government/dl...

Academic Institutions https://libraries.acm.org/acmopen

Individuals https://dl.acm.org/action/publisherEcommerceHelper?doi=10.55...

Also, the 'Basic Edition' provided for free to individuals without institutional/individual accounts, the ACM explains, does not include niceties such as 'Advanced Search' (e.g., filters), which requires an upgrade https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55017806873_c9ba2490c1_b...

agumonkey•43m ago

Kudos. I wonder how long it took to 1) decide this move, 2) actually migrate their system

macintux•40m ago

Discussed extensively two weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46313991 (243 comments)

lioeters•29m ago

Let's do a "best of" ACM, to list everyone's favorite articles.

First thing that comes to mind for me are the series of articles presented at HOPL conferences, History of Programming Languages.

HOPL II (1993) https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.1145/154766

HOPL III (2007) https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.1145/1238844

HOPL IV (2021) https://dl.acm.org/do/10.1145/event-12215/abs/

chaboud•25m ago

I love that I can now just drop the link to this gem:

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1165555.1165556

Aggregability is NP-Hard... Useful the next time someone insists that it's possible to find a "perfect" model for a non-trivial ML problem. (I get this ask 1-2 times per month.)

ACM Is Now Open Access

OpenWorkers: Self-Hosted Cloudflare Workers in Rust

2025 Letter

Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

Python Numbers Every Programmer Should Know

Heap Overflow in FFmpeg EXIF

Implementing HNSW (Hierarchical Navigable Small World) Vector Search in PHP

Sony PS5 ROM keys leaked – jailbreaking could be made easier with BootROM codes

iOS allows alternative browser engines in Japan

Common Lisp SDK for the Datastar Hypermedia Framework

Build a Deep Learning Library

2025: The Year in LLMs

BYD Sells 4.6M Vehicles in 2025, Meets Revised Sales Goal

Meta made scam ads harder to find instead of removing them

Ultra-Wide Band: A Transformational Technology for the Internet of Things

Easel Turns One One year of building my own IDE in Clojure

A font with built-in TeX syntax highlighting

European Space Agency hit again as cybercriminals claim 200 GB data up for sale

I canceled my book deal

I rebooted my social life

Autism Hasn't Increased

Pokémon Team Optimization

Beyond the Nat: Cgnat, Bandwidth, and Practical Tunneling

A Christmas Present to Myself – Vector Network Analyzer (2014)

Show HN: I created a tool to design and create foamcore inserts for boardgames

Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

Web Browsers have stopped blocking pop-ups

Flow5 released to open source

Show HN: BusterMQ, Thread-per-core NATS server in Zig with io_uring

Build Software. Build Users

ACM Is Now Open Access

Comments

ACM Is Now Open Access

OpenWorkers: Self-Hosted Cloudflare Workers in Rust

2025 Letter

Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

Python Numbers Every Programmer Should Know

Heap Overflow in FFmpeg EXIF

Implementing HNSW (Hierarchical Navigable Small World) Vector Search in PHP

Sony PS5 ROM keys leaked – jailbreaking could be made easier with BootROM codes

iOS allows alternative browser engines in Japan

Common Lisp SDK for the Datastar Hypermedia Framework

Build a Deep Learning Library

2025: The Year in LLMs

BYD Sells 4.6M Vehicles in 2025, Meets Revised Sales Goal

Meta made scam ads harder to find instead of removing them

Ultra-Wide Band: A Transformational Technology for the Internet of Things

Easel Turns One One year of building my own IDE in Clojure

A font with built-in TeX syntax highlighting

European Space Agency hit again as cybercriminals claim 200 GB data up for sale

I canceled my book deal

I rebooted my social life

Autism Hasn't Increased

Pokémon Team Optimization

Beyond the Nat: Cgnat, Bandwidth, and Practical Tunneling

A Christmas Present to Myself – Vector Network Analyzer (2014)

Show HN: I created a tool to design and create foamcore inserts for boardgames

Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

Web Browsers have stopped blocking pop-ups

Flow5 released to open source

Show HN: BusterMQ, Thread-per-core NATS server in Zig with io_uring

Build Software. Build Users