Comment by Fordec

That's the current culture, but culture changes. Gauss, Onsager and Grothendieck hid their work. "Pauca sed matura".

Your best interest only means your current best interest. What makes for the best form of personal interest is evolutionary, not static.

Dresden Codak as a story has a concept of "Dark Science" where the world has the benefit doesn't come from publishing science, but from utilizing it. If you understand a piece of science when nobody else does, and integrate it into your technology, you have a strategic non-academic physical advantage. Trade secrets basically. And trade secrets used to be the norm prior to patent law. We could be in the pre-"AI patent" era where the government created incentive to share your AI findings isn't made strong enough yet.

Science is today built on the shoulders of giants, but what if an agent swarm makes your own tower of giants in a day? Why do you need an ecosystem of peer review, if you can discover your own science from first principles without meaningful effort? Yes, it's duplicated effort, but why does that matter if the monetary cost of effort trends to zero? The value of peer review is going to have to contend deeply with itself just like how open source developers have had to contend with the value and mechanisms of inbound AI generated PRs the last six months.