Consider this a "devil's advocate" position. I'm personally in favor of radical openness in conducting and publishing scientific work. The one argument argument I find difficult to counter, however, is that keeping everything entirely open (most notably, access to the published article) severely undermines one of the sources of revenue to keep doing science.
This question approaches the same topic, but not in general. In the short run there may be organizations that provide funds and allow for open access, but if there absolutely no funding stream, such organizations may not continue doing so. Universities, of course, have other sources of funding, but it seems limiting to suggest that all science will just be at universities that can afford to support journal operation and publication over and above their other obligations.
So, are there funding streams that open science can employ without sacrificing openness?
This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)