Old and Busted: Facebook for Scientists — The New Hotness? eBay for Scientists
Hitting the wallet, watch, and workload makes more sense, but Science Exchange still has some details to iron out.
Hitting the wallet, watch, and workload makes more sense, but Science Exchange still has some details to iron out.
Hype and marketing angles aren’t adequate ways to truly help real people succeed in the information age.
A viral book sensation’s obvious story may not be as obvious as some think, harder to replicate, and indicative of a strong counter-trend.
Major social media plays in science hit the rocks, as hype hits reality and the culture of science.
Promises of more citations if authors pay are problematic in more ways than one.
The Google Books Settlement actually hit its second roadblock this week. Here’s why, and where matter might go from here.
A study of social media adoption hides some sensible lessons within a jumble of other signals.
New publishing initiatives link concepts like “importance” to social metrics like popularity and sharing. Is this logical? Can these metrics be easily gamed?
After wondering at the supposed burden of peer-review, more evidence emerged that it still works well, and is probably less taxing than other alternatives.
The false premise of replacement means the future isn’t destructive, just additive.
Another science blogging network implodes, a sign that the age of exuberance is giving way to the business realities.
Is our future defined by third-party aggregators? Or is there a business opportunity there worth fighting for?
Despite hand-wringing about the Times UK’s paywall, the numbers show that revenues may have justified the move.
Can social reputation metrics provide a meaningful incentive for researcher participation in peer-review and online commentary?
What happens when a proposed solution for a problem becomes an end unto itself? Is peer review really more important than research itself?