"Imagine putting the Feynman Lectures on Physics up for public editing on a wiki (Feynmanpedia). Would they get better or worse?... there’s a useful notion of a “set point”, a quality level that an article written by [a wiki] community will converge to.." - Michael Nielsen
But then imagine that you can't log in to the Feynman wiki unless you have at least three papers in arXiv: surely the set point will be higher now? In other words, by gating the community, perhaps you can manipulate the set point. - Bill Hooker
That's a great idea, Bill, and there would be some prestige value to being able to edit, but you're left with the problem of who decides the criteria. - Mr. Gunn
While it's not quite on par with Feynman, I've considered putting the introduction to my PhD thesis up as a wiki, with an idea the others could expand it, keep it up to date and maybe even correct any errors ... ultimately hoping that the quality "set point" could be raised, or at least maintained. I think in reality the subject (mitochondrial protein import) is probably too small for anyone other than spammers/trolls/vandals to actually edit it ... - Andrew Perry
and adding a qualification hurdle would make the 1 % Rule more like a "1% of 1% rule" ... still, maybe I should think about doing it anyway ... there's really nothing to lose ... - Andrew Perry
Andrew, I think that's a great idea. Every thesis intro is essentially a "basics of X" -- if there were some way to collect them, the result would become an Encyclopaedic Introduction to Every Scholarly Subject Ever. And as a wiki, it could be kept up to date, and the choice of editors is actually very simple in this case: authors of subsequent, related theses. - Bill Hooker
(Curse the FF chr limit!) F'rinstance, yours will certainly not be the last thesis on mitochondrial proteins, or even on import, so the supply of qualified and motivated editors is endless. The more I think about this the more I like it. - Bill Hooker
But we still struggle to find editors. For instance the reviews section on openwetware (http://openwetware.org/wiki/Re...) is pretty moribund. I would worry about qualification though as it reduces your pool. Surely the aim is to try and set something up so that the community is self selecting? Exactly how you do that I don't know of course. - Cameron Neylon
All of this may be true but as the Union person says I don't know anyone who works their contracted hours or takes all their holidays. Whether thats a personal choice or something forced on academics is really the key point. But if researchers and academics worked to rule universities would collapse within days. - Cameron Neylon
If I worked my contracted hours, I could go home Wednesday afternoon, and my pay would be more than 8€/hour... - Björn Brembs
Would be interested in hearing from somebody in the know about how big / important (or otherwise) these particular databases are, though. - Euan
sounds great - I wonder when they will be available. It's interesting that these databases were (presumably) not bringing in sufficient revenues to justify keeping them proprietary - Adrian Heilbut
Galapagos has always been one of the places I wanted to work. This made that even more clear. Belgium rules :-) - Jan Aerts
I was looking at it together with Cameron's twitter account - I think it's live (he went into a room not so long after twittering about waiting for a taxi). - Pawel Szczesny
There seems to be some silence about this event on Twitter... - Berci Mesko
A problem I have, is that I don't own all the data I'm using to make it available. So it's difficult to make my 100% research open. - Michael Barton
Plus, as work becomes more interesting, and therefore 'increases in publication value', collaborators are less willing to share. - Michael Barton
Michael, it's a common issue for all of us at this certain level of scientific independence :) - Pawel Szczesny
So my point would be, if I was working on my own I can share everything, otherwise I have to compromise with collaborators needs. - Michael Barton
@Pawel True, true, true. I guess that's part of why you're a freelance scientist? - Michael Barton
Another thing I find, even if you're working on your own, you can't always share your research because the data you're using might not have the license which allows you do so. Such as you have to email someone to get the data. - Michael Barton
Michael, all true. It varies by topic of one's research, but I also have faced licensing issues. All this stuff is a more of a problem than potential scooping. If one cannot convince 100% people involved, sharing is not going to work at all. Working as a freelancing scientist has this independence, but on the other hand I have much more collaborations than I would have following traditional path. Which means more people involved and more potential disagreements on the data sharing... - Pawel Szczesny
I guess bioinformatics is suited to ONS because the costs are very small and because it's easy to share scripts and data online. On the other hand, it may be less suited because it's entirely based on using existing data, most of which will have been generated by other people. - Michael Barton
@Michael - even if you're working on your own there are still issues with funders, institutions and others thinking the best way to their pound of flesh is to keep everything tied down. I think the funders are starting to change this but it will take a while. - Cameron Neylon
Cameron, you start convincing me that having no salary is a good thing :) (no salary, no institution issues) - Pawel Szczesny
@pawel no food..? There are some good thing about working. Being independently wealthy would be better but i cant see that happening soon - Cameron Neylon via fftogo
Cameron, in my case I don't need to bother with my host institute policy/licensing for projects I do on a side, because I'm not employed (I'm not sure about UK, but I heard that in the US all your IP rights belong to the host university/institute). My income doesn't come from a salary. - Pawel Szczesny
Missed it. Between bad connectivity and packing for work and OSCON - Deepak
I think it was recorded - I was failing to follow the second screen anyway - need to think about how best to do that. - Cameron Neylon
One of the things I would really like to have in a presentation software is embedded web browser, so I could put something that looks like a screenshot but interact with it, like with a normal browser window. In such way you could have Twitter stream at the bottom of your presentation :). - Pawel Szczesny
You know someone made exactly the same comment to me afterwards. Slideshare is great but even if you embed links to the images in ppt presentation they get lost on the flash conversion. I think a twitter stream would havehelped - Cameron Neylon
This will get you through to the links for the live video of my talk tomorrow 'Science in the YouTube Age' (see also http://blog.openwetware.org/sc...). I will also be aiming to record a screen cast (video card permitting). I'm taking two laptops with me - so will try to answer any questions (and possibly alter flow of talk) at either at this item, via twitter (@cameronneylon) or on the liveblog service at the above link. I make no promises that any of this will actually work :) - Cameron Neylon
just occurs to me - can we do anything cool with a linkup to ISMB? Was going to use the coverage there as one of my examples... - Cameron Neylon
Cameron - Just to confirm, you'll be on at 12:45 UTC? Not sure whether I'll be able to watch it live (it's a bit early, here in Toronto!), but good luck! - Michael Nielsen
This will get you through to the links for the live video of my talk tomorrow 'Science in the YouTube Age' (see also http://blog.openwetware.org/sc...). I will also be aiming to record a screen cast (video card permitting). I'm taking two laptops with me - so will try to answer any questions (and possibly alter flow of talk) at either at this item, via twitter (@cameronneylon) or on the liveblog service at the above link. I make no promises that any of this will actually work :) - Cameron Neylon
Greg suggests a set of standards that could be used to determine whether a piece of research is open, and the use of a badge to indicate when it is. - Michael Nielsen
It'd be interesting to convene a group of open scientists and people from the journals to talk about this, and perhaps come to some preliminary agreement. Imagine if, e.g., Nature authors had the option to say at the end of their paper "This paper meets the standards of the Open Science Initiative for reproducibility and disclosure." - Michael Nielsen
Personally I dislike stuff like badges in such cases. It re-emphasizes something that should be the norm. However, to add that last line in publications is not a bad idea - Deepak
I'm with Deepak, I don't like this idea much. Who is going to run the Open Science Initiative? Who is going to decide what their standards are? I suppose the antecedents are things like the BBB Declarations for Open Access and the Free Software Foundation, which have done some good things in their respective domains. I guess my feeling is that it's too early to begin codifying and declaring authorities and definitions. - Bill Hooker
Further thought -- think this is what Deepak means in his second sentence above -- why aren't ALL papers being held to these standards? - Bill Hooker
I think that is the point - but we need a name for this. Something quick and easy that rolls of the tongue. Not a badge per se but something you can assert you are doing. And we will be here to criticise if it isn't up to scratch. - Cameron Neylon
I think 'convene' is possibly the wrong word. Punt around a set of possibilities online and talk about them wherever we meet seems more in tune with what we are trying to do :) - Cameron Neylon
Bill - Of course all papers should be held to these standards. However, I think very few papers currently do meet these standards. That's exactly why providing a standardized way of indicating a commitment to those standards would be powerful. - Michael Nielsen
Cameron - Of course, punting around the ideas is great! But many people need to buy in for this kind of thing (or most other open science proposals) to gain acceptance. It'd be nice to have a meeting which involved a bunch of journal editors, open scientists, and funders, to bat around ideas like this, and come up with something everyone (or at least most people) can agree to... - Michael Nielsen
... It's great that there are a few people from Nature and PLoS here on FF. But we need more involvement from the journals and from funding people if many of these changes are to happen. That's why I used the term "convene". - Michael Nielsen
Isn't being published in a open access journal a necessary and sufficient condition for the research being "certified" open? - Mr. Gunn
Mr Gunn - There are many different meanings for open. E.g., it can mean that the final result is open; the data are open; it was developed through an open process (e.g., open notebook science); it has an open license encouraging reuse and modification; or many other things. OA journals address the first of these issues, and to a limited extent the licensing issue as well, but they don't address many of the other issues. It's those issues I'm talking about. - Michael Nielsen
@Bill Hooker: the Open Source Initiative (www.opensource.org) would be a good model to look at: by engaging a broad cross-section of the FLOSS community in defining what "open" meant (for software), they actually played a significant role in helping the community grow. My feeling is that the process of defining what "open science" is (more exactly, what standards scientific work must meet in order for it to be considered "open") will accelerate growth in exactly the same way. - Greg Wilson
The term "open science" has been used in so many different ways that it is probably too late to take it back. For example many people think that Open Access is equivalent to Open Science. It is still useful as a nebulous term to unite people at conference session. - Jean-Claude Bradley
Mike - it is still probably a worthwhile exercise if only to underscore how much we disagree. For example I would not consider a paper certified as "Open Science" if it just linked to selected pages in a researcher's notebook. I would like to see ALL the failed experiments related to a project. But saying "links to certain lab notebook pages are provided" would be fine. - Jean-Claude Bradley
We can probably come to consensus on some minimal standard. If we get too caught up in details, all that happens is that people tend to lose interest or you get caught up in dogma - Deepak
What is being discussed here in principle is very similar as to why science commons exist (http://sciencecommons.org/). I would suggest these guys would be the first port of call if you are considering "stamping" your data with some kind open science license (What is science commons - http://creativecommons.org/web...) - Frank
@Greg: also, the Open Knowledge Foundation has probably already invented a lot of the necessary wheels. The idea is growing on me. My big concern is balkanization: I'd hate to see a Free/Open Source-style schism develop in Open Science before it even got to mean anything! Would it be useful to ask existing related organizations to the table? Science Commons, OKF, OpenWetWare, Free Software Foundation, OSI, PLoS, BMC, Hindawi, other OA publishers...? - Bill Hooker
on the case with trying to get stronger links with science commons. Hope to have more to report by scifoo and psb meetings, this is what i was doing last week. Also Kaitlin Thaney (sc project manager - i think that is right title) is around here from time to time. - Cameron Neylon via fftogo
“A good group got together for a blogger/open science meetup type thing at the Loose Moose. Greg Wilson, Pedro, Neil, Michael Kuhn, Michael Nielsen, Joe Anderson, and myself.”
Some of the topics included reproducibility (is it possible, even in silico? what are the criteria? can we institute a badge of some sort to indicate compliance with the criteria? The story of the Russians and the sapphire-lasing study is telling, video logging may help), URL and data citation/impact factors as opposed to just publications, (dis)incentives to go open, blogging and recruitment/exposure, good research practices and their lack of adoption (version control as an example) - Shirley Wu
Greg also asked what the desired outcome of the PSB workshop is, and I didn't have a good answer. Michael N brought up the good point that for OA to really get momentum, they first got a lot of powerhouses - funding agencies, namely - to buy-in, and signed declarations helped a lot. So perhaps using reflections on all the other Open * meetings this year we can devise a productive agenda with concrete outcomes (one of which may be drafting a declaration that we will promote to big names). - Shirley Wu
Greg also mentioned that about 9 years ago people were talking about very much open sciencey things (as open source was starting to take off) with the same fervor, but nothing has happened in the intervening time and now we are back at that point. What needs to happen to make sure that that doesn't happen this time? Are things different now, and how? - Shirley Wu
Another interesting thought was if in the next few years, students will gravitate towards PIs who adopt more open practices, who blog, who are more willing to incorporate "Web 2.0" tools into their work and research. Michael N and Greg both agreed that their blogging was a major reason their students joined their labs. Will students indirectly effect change by placing a new type of selective pressure on schools and faculty? - Shirley Wu
This meeting got me thinking that open science is very ill-defined, other than as "a nice idea". Need to get my own thoughts in order on what it all means. - Neil Saunders
I agree. OA is very well defined and this is a good thing. But it will be hard to sell open science to big names unless we know what it is, exactly, that we're selling. This may mean breaking open science down into a few core components which may be easier to define individually, and a declaration (or two, or three) may come out of that more naturally. - Shirley Wu
Neil, which is why I think scientists should think about marketing and branding, not because these are good things per se, but because if you can wrap an idea around something, it's easier to convey - Deepak
I think the branding/definition thing is good. I think for instance it is clear to most people what Open Notebook Science is, partly because Jean-Claude and others are active in defending the definition of the term. Maybe some other terms to cover 'full data disclosure on publication' 'publishing all results' and similar more precise things. - Cameron Neylon
This is really not going very well. First I point the instrument at the wrong sample and record 20 minutes of D2O, then I correct it and forget to open the beam stop. Coffee is required. - Cameron Neylon
http://myExperiment.org/ is indeed a rather interesting approach to make ones work reproducable. I have two metabolomics workflows on that side, and just wondered if it also supports storing input data (pointers, at least)... should explore that... - Egon Willighagen
There isn't at the moment the facility I think for doi ng this. You can store 'blob's or at least there is a plan to let you. I'm not sure whether non-workflow stuff shouldn't really be elsewhere. That's my 'do one thing and do it well' philosophy - Cameron Neylon
of course I don't agree with the assumption that extreme openness is pointless with the current archiving system - Jean-Claude Bradley
I'm beginning to feel that a lot of this is a failure of imagination. Filtering is a problem but 99.999% of all stuff on the web is wrong or useless. That doesn't stop it being the most efficient information gathering tool ever invented. The random person looking for advice on how to run an Ugi reaction still finds Jean-Claude. This is not just the 'wisdom of crowds' - this is a qualitatively different way of finding information. - Cameron Neylon
David Crotty is trying to become the Nicholas Carr of open science. He takes contrarian positions, but I do think he asks some good questions. The problem is that to answer his questions, you have to be able to point to applications currently being used right now at the moment addressing the specific problem he's talking about, which is why his occasional posts are of the form, "why X is failing". - Mr. Gunn
I agree - I ran out of space to say that overall I think David Crotty speaks a lot of sense. I was just a bit less impressed by this post than I usually am. I just think that the 'I won't be able to find anything' argument is specious because people obviously do. - Cameron Neylon
edit: deleted post, adding heat not light. stupid of me. suffice to say I am not impressed with DC's arguments. - Bill Hooker
JoVE people weren't sure - that's how they'll record it then - Jean-Claude Bradley
otherwise the 'Ugi dance' doesn't scan nearly as well - Cameron Neylon
There are many words in science that I've never heard spoken and don't know how to pronounce correctly. Maybe we need a social website where people can contribute spoken recordings and we vote on what's correct :) - Neil Saunders
Neil they do have sites like that but didn't have the name Ugi - so far Google 0/ FF 1 - Jean-Claude Bradley
Meeeetochondria or Might-oh-chondria? - Bora Zivkovic
might-o-kondreeya. pretty sure about that one. - Bill Hooker
apopTOsis or aPOPtosis? if the former, first a as in "way" or as in "cat"? - Bill Hooker
I've heard both meeto and mighto from mouths of cell biologists! - Bora Zivkovic
at least the mitochondria won't take offense if you mispronounce their name :) - Jean-Claude Bradley
I always search in PubMed and use the list of related links that comes up with every abstract, and then keep clicking and clicking until I have way too many papers. That wouldn't happen if I searched for things offline (unless the paper is in a theme issue, where the papers before and after it are on related topics) so I think I actually get *more* references because of all the hyperlinking. - Eva
i haven't had time to read the article, but the accompanying perspective article indicates that others have been finding the exact opposite result... - mad -
Serendipitous discovery is why online rules, so I am not sure what the hell the person is talking about - Deepak
The author argues exactly that -- serendipitous discovery is on the decline because of targeted searches and following hyperlinks, instead of browsing table of contents. Although one might argue that serendiiptious discovery in a world bursting with information sources probably isn't the most efficient way to procure new knowledge. ;) - Todd Harris via twhirl
Librarians sometimes note the decline of "serendipitous discovery", but I wonder if they're actually mourning the partial passing of paper-and-shelf serendipity. Eva's use of PubMed's Abstract Plus feature seems somewhat serendipitous to me, but there is something to be said for browsing the table of contents. Journals often have a distinct character and attract or select publications which belong together under one cover. I think good research requires both browsing and targeted searching. - Jere - bioethx librarian
Just read the abstract. Makes no sense to me at all. Also, somewhat ironic that an article on restricted information is itself unreadable without subscription. - Neil Saunders
If anyone blogs about it, just drop a link here - Bora Zivkovic
Jere, yes, but it's far easier to browse online than in print. The barrier is just too high with print. I know my diversity of knowledge increased exponentially after I went mostly online. And why should a journal decide what goes together. I trust myself to do a good job of that and mix and match as required. - Deepak
I've only browsed the article and I don't know enough statistics to criticise this but there are two things that appear to me to be missing. One is the possibility that (not necessarily related to journals moving online) science is just moving faster and bigger so citation to older material is less relevant. If I think of my PhD thesis 8 years ago I was routinely citing stuff 15-20 years old. I don't do that in current papers because less of it is relevant. - Cameron Neylon
My other thought was that the other explanation is that we already have improved filtering mechanisms so people are finding the better papers more efficiently. There seems to be an assumption in the paper that more concentration must be dysfunctional - without an analysis of whether it might be an indicator of functional improvement in appraoch - Cameron Neylon
Perhaps with greater accessibility, people have quit citing old papers just because everyone always cites those without even reading them. Those who have the least access, tend to cite very old stuff, textbooks, popsci articles, e.g., http://scienceblogs.com/clock/... - Bora Zivkovic
This could merely be a criticism of contemporary electronic search methods, which in the future would no doubt become a] more evolved (see 'google sets' experiment in google labs) and b] present higher visibility over the fence of the particular maze you're in right now. It's certainly true that electronic search in the contemporary context has a funnelling effect, while appearing to present diversity. Look how many people turn up at the same places at the same time whenever something interesting is said! - Ian Tindale
I've read the paper, but can't make sense of the figures. Can anyone translate? - hubfeed
Actually, I've just thought of something. If we took this to be an implementation or instance of the 'wisdom of crowds' mechanism, and if we also assume that there's generally a continuous high risk of information overload in today's modern world, and if we also chuck in a stance that the infosphere has an inherent high signal to noise ratio (looking for a certain ratio), then perhaps this is the infosphere's way of directing one to the stuff that matters. Ignoring what others are ignoring is economical. - Ian Tindale
Yeah, me too. I have to sign in to download the file. By the way, great stuff. :-) - Ricardo Vidal
Precedings has a SlideShare type viewer now - maybe try that too - Jean-Claude Bradley
It seems that the flash conversion doesn't work with the transparency of that image. WIll work on it when I have a minute. Currently supposed to be doing an experiment at ILL - Cameron Neylon
Feel free to download if that works better obviously - can anyone do me a favour? Looks like the quickest way to solve problem is convert to pdf and upload that - online pdf converters are failing me for some reason and I don't have any working converters on this laptop. File is at http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/243... Could someone convert to pdf and either email it back to me at C dot Neylon at rl.ac.uk or just post it somewhere I can get at it? Need sleep now. - Cameron Neylon
Cameron, you must be tired - getting an error message from that Dropbox location - Sally Church
Thanks for that. @Sally, yeh its been a long week, but I think in this case it was just still synchronising. Hopefully things will be improved now. Slidshare just converting the pdf version now - Cameron Neylon
aarrggh! Same problem. Think I will have to re-do the image... - Cameron Neylon
I don't know - maybe many of you have heard him speak before but this was incisive and inspiration and challenging. The specific challenge was 'we have a day tomorrow to sort out the future direction(s) to make open science actually happen'. Impressive set of people here and I think there will be serious outcomes out of tomorrow. My concern would be there is too much emphasis on standardisation which is positive but probably not the rightl language to be using and potentially technologically backwards. Too late to write a blog post but will try to update via twitter tomorrow (no wireless in meeting venue as far as I can see) - Cameron Neylon
communication first - standardization second. We can always apply standards retroactively - Jean-Claude Bradley
@Jean-Claude - Standardization probably at the moment has the connotations of data models and reporting requirements which is one interpretation and in this sense can come second to dissemination. However, communication needs to be "standardised". In the open science world if you make your data open, it is of little value if nobody else can interpret it....(out of characters :( ........ - Frank
......For example, if you publish your lab book in Swahili only those people that know Swahili will understand your data - therefore, limiting its value. What I believe is important is standardized communication. Or rather - shared semantics. This is not to say you must use these words, it means if you use these words, I understand what they mean (or what you meant), or maybe more importantly a computer can understand/interpret the meaning of data. a.k.a semantic Web and rich life-science ontologies - Frank
@Jean-Claude, I think that was kind of what came out at the end. We need to just get on and do this and really start to identify what the problems are. Then we can worry about solving them :) Some standardisation will help but we need to communicate first. First step. All of these social networking sites... - Cameron Neylon
Frank - if the only way to publish your lab notebook in real time is to do it in Swhahili then do that - worry about the translation later. That has to be better than not publishing it at all. We still don't have a way of representing all possible procedures and outcomes in a semantically rich format in my lab and that's why we still rely on free text on a wiki. Over time we'll get it all translated to a machine readable format - Jean-Claude Bradley
Or to put it another way - we seem to worry so much about getting the recording process perfect in advance that we never get around to getting on with it and just doing it. - Cameron Neylon
Certainly, I was not trying to say we should do nothing, or wait until "standards" exist. Definitely we should make as much available as possible in whatever format. I was just wishing to highlight that semantics is as important as (maybe more so) than structure and that communication and standardisation are not necessarily disjoint, although we do seem to be coping well enough with Google at the moment. - Frank
That's the point Google also makes, but on the other hand, they brute force in a lot of semantics and structure, so it's somewhat implicit. - Deepak
This essay describes some of the benefits and promise of open science. It's intended for a broad audience. Comments and suggestions would be most welcome! - Michael Nielsen
Great essay. My first comment is concerning participation of scientists in commenting system: I wonder if the rule 90-9-1 applies here? When we look at the activity in the LS room it's clear that majority of members are rather passive. - Pawel Szczesny
It seems like a special case of the general class of intellectual property problems? Short term, you can have some kind of rights management that facilitates the kind of trust networks mentioned in the essay. Shoe stores sell commodities... whereas a brilliant idea could be worth nothing, or billions. Long term, you would need to radically change the economics. People might give away a certain amount for free, but they want to be able to pay their rent too, and profit from their ideas. - Karim
If you can solve the problem for music, movies, books, and software, you can solve it for science ;-) - Karim
Karim - You're certainly right that it is a special case of the general class of intellectual property problems. Unfortunately, the analysis of IP problems that people like Lawrence Lessig and Yochai Benkler have done for popular culture (e.g., music, movies, books etc) does not hold in the case of science, because of the very different economic model used to support scientists... - Michael Nielsen
No? I'm ignorant of how it does, but then again I haven't given it much thought either. :-) I know a grant isn't *strictly* equivalent to a book deal ;-) but there are some similarities... - Karim
It's the long term economics that are significantly different. And who owns and controls the rights. - Deepak
@Michael the shoe story from Barcelona was 'The internet is better for selling shoes than doing science. What we need to realise is all the issues that made that possible. Perhaps seeing the fully web based science as 'impossible' is just the same situation as e.g. Amazon would have faced ten years ago' slightly paraphrasing John Wilbanks but the point was think back to no method of delivery, no secure online payments, no appropriate stock managements systems etc etc - Cameron Neylon
excellent essay - posted my comment there! Thanks! - Björn Brembs
This may be very useful in explaining the vision to those not operating directly in STM activities but providing support through services, tools, etc.. - Jill O'Neill
Jill - I hope so. If you do use it in this context, I'd be very interested to hear how it goes. - Michael Nielsen
Bjoern - Thanks for the thoughtful comment, will try to respond in the next 24 hours. - Michael Nielsen
science as walled garden is not too far off as analogy, in that sense the ephemeralization brought by the internet is a boon, though the change is not comfortable to contemplate for "scientists" - gregory lent
the definition of science needs rethinking ... and like all "ist" words, communist, feminist, there is an element of adherence to the word scientist that is extremely limiting in these fast moving times .. - gregory lent
one more whack at it, then i will quit, science is really good at analyzing the bumps on the orange, have even discovered pigment, but have no idea of the fruit inside, and not a clue about the magic of the seeds that can make new oranges ... something needs to open up in the minds of scientists, frankly - gregory lent
Excellent article with lots of food for thought! - Jo Vermeulen
So that you appreciate the money your library has spent on giving you access :) - Cameron Neylon
I'm going to suggest they stop doing so, because everybody I know avoids it whenever possible. - Mr. Gunn
I only use WOK when forced to (which is generally to do comprehensive ego/citation searches - significant proportion of my papers are not indexed in pubmed). Otherwise its pubmed and google scholar all the way. - Cameron Neylon
How ought they to improve the navigation? What's the real point of friction? Have you concrete suggestions? - Jill O'Neill
There should be a big button next to the record; you click it and it takes you to the paper (if you have access). At the moment you click one button to check for access and you land on a page with a set of links which are not terribly clear as to what they mean. If the TDNet page said 'This paper is available from ...' that would be an improvement but I prefer the PubMed big button approach - Cameron Neylon
From our internal Blogs. Hope this shares ok. This is an important step for the Blog based notebooks and Andrew deserves the credit for pushing this forward. There have been a bunch of little but important things adding up to what will be the next version of the platform and over the next few months I will be aiming to try and show a bit more of what we think are the good points and important ideas (and some of the
