On impact factor

We recommend that the term "impact factor" be abolished and that this measure be renamed in keeping with its actual role, that merely of a time-specific "citation rate index" and nothing more. What is currently called the "impact factor" should not be misused to evaluate journals or to validate the scientific relevance of a particular researcher or research program, especially in decisions regarding employment, funding, and tenure.

(from The journal "impact factor": a misnamed, misleading, misused measure by Hecht F, et al.)

Impact Factors reflect the journal not the article, vary with time and correlate only poorly with perceived excellence. Simple comparison of impact factors in different specialties may be misleading. Review journals often have higher Impact Factors than those with original data. Both authors and editors can try to manipulate journal Impact Factors

(from Impact factors: uses and abuses by James Neuberger and Christopher Counsell - pdf)

A new sustainability model for Open Access

PeerJ is a new proposal in the world of the scientific journals with Open Access licenses. They write:

First, the tax payers deserve free access to research they've paid for. "They won't understand it" is not a valid excuse. Neither is calling Open Access an unsustainable model.
Second, the research community greatly benefits from unencumbered access to the research. And it helps the individual authors rapidly gain credit and revise their work. PeerJ is striving to make research a living process, not a set in stone PDF.

This philosophy is very good and resume all critical points in the OA model proposed by the great publishers. And it seems that this new model will be applied:

PeerJ is establishing a new sustainability model. Researchers will be able to purchase Lifetime Memberships, starting at just $99, giving them the rights to publish their articles in our peer reviewed journal. All published articles are made freely available to the public. Subscription fees made sense in a pre-Internet world, but now they just slow the progress of science. It's time to change that.

In this way each researchers, also in Africa, for example, can afford to support Open Access.
I hope that this is not a dream.

Thanks to OggiScienza.