Yeah, I really don't see how this will reduce journal quality. Maybe he's just pissed he won't be able to page through his favorite journals at breakfy and was trying to bolster that with an argument about journal quality suffering. He could always just get a netbook and scroll through his favorite articles :)
- Brian Krueger - LabSpaces
I still think they should have interviewed other people than me, though. It is not like I was the main person behind what happened on FriendFeed at ISMB in Toronto.
- Lars Juhl Jensen
Some of these comments confuse me slightly. The definition of "publishing" is the process of production and dissemination of literature or information (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki...) why do some scientists confuse publishing only to be a peer-reviewed journal publication and assume other methods- giving talks, posters, slides, open notebooks are not "publication"?
- Frank
@Frank absolutely, publication is "to make content publicly known." public-ation
- Duncan Hull
That's a long story, Frank, but it boils down to the currently dominating definition of scientific "publication" stemming from the pre-web era when journals were more widely circulatable then the other kinds. And, for the last five decades or so, all major scientific journals have used pre-publication peer review to decide which content comes into the journal, since printing on paper was (and still is) expensive.
- Daniel Mietchen
Repost of my comment on the Nature web site: I also find it ironic that people go to conferences to present their work and at the same time want to keep their discoveries secret. On the other hand, if people abstain from presenting new results then why would anyone want to participate in conferences? In some fields, computer science comes to mind, the best work is published in...
more...
- Lars Juhl Jensen
I guessed it's because this feed is Custom RSS/Atom, rather than blog import. But now I look, so is yours...maybe a blogger vs wordpress difference?
- Neil Saunders
Right, I think Neil is right. I didn't set this behavior anywhere.
- Pedro Beltrao
Normal scientific publishing: someone writes a technical comment and the author of the original paper writes a response. Turn-around time is measured in months. Science blogging: same thing, only the turn-around time is less than 24 hours :)
- Lars Juhl Jensen
I wonder how well these are picked up by PLoS. In any case I might add these to the comments section.
- Pedro Beltrao
I was just about to suggest that you might want to add a comment to the paper to refer the reader to your blog post
- Lars Juhl Jensen
my first postdoc paper (as mentioned here http://ff.im/2EIMm) is out. I have permission to share the continuation of this work, as it happens, on the blog so I hope to finally have a bit more time to blog about work now.
- Pedro Beltrao
Anthony says, "I don't have the solution, yet, but whatever we do in the future, it's not going to involve $48,000 genome re-sequencing. That information on it's own is pretty useless - we'll have to study expression (WTSS or RNA-Seq, so figure another $30,000), changes to epigenetics (of which there are many histone marks, so figure 30 x $10,000) and even dna methylation (I don't begin to know what this process costs.)"
- Steve Koch
I guess we have to start from somewhere. Even just the effort of quantifying error rates of the different technologies and measuring how much information they have for different predictive models is a very important task.
- Pedro Beltrao
To paraphrase something I read: We've pretty much got reading genotypes figured out. The bottleneck is now assaying phenotypes. Without high-throughput, accurate phenotype measurements, all the genotypes in the world aren't much use.
- Chris Miller
And we're going to need more than expression and epigenetics - we also need clinical data on patient health and outcome, which is a lot more expensive and time-consuming to collect
- Chris Miller