Joe's Picks for 2010: Reckless Enthusiasm and the Platform Wars
It’s been a reckless year marked by books becoming cannon fodder in the platform wars.
It’s been a reckless year marked by books becoming cannon fodder in the platform wars.
A traffic phenomenon from a post about PLoS ONE may indicate that impact factors are more important to authors than PLoS believes.
A problem in recruiting competent peer-reviewers may be the fault of email spam blockers, not the unwillingness of academics to review.
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.
A short video explaining how the list is made.
What better way to show how to make a great PowerPoint than with PowerPoint examples?
Is the growth of open access journals a sign of market success or dysfunction? Two new studies analyze the data and come to opposite conclusions.
Britain’s response to economic hard times might infect the US higher education system, and lead to major cuts in the humanities and social sciences.
The self-publishing adventure that began here two years ago winds down. What worked? What didn’t?
Sensors are being applied to mobile phones, which will launch a new suite of publishing opportunities. By aggregating and interpreting the data uploaded from these mobile sensors, publishers can create new services and open up new markets.
The Wikileaks scandal shows that commercial cloud providers aren’t ready for the realities of publishing and information hosting.
NIH-funded researchers append name to ghost-written textbook. Is it time for physicians to heal themselves?
Rick Anderson from the University of Utah joins the Chefs.
Do the benefits of open peer-review outweigh the costs? A BMJ study argues “yes,” but there are caveats.
Looking for some holiday reading? The Chefs offer insights into impressive books they’re currently reading (or have recently read).