The "Open" Prescription — Why It Doesn't Always Make Sense
The rhetoric of “open” seeks to rally science to some higher state, but it’s not clear what “open science” means, why it’s any better, and what the risks of its adoption might be.
The rhetoric of “open” seeks to rally science to some higher state, but it’s not clear what “open science” means, why it’s any better, and what the risks of its adoption might be.
The clear benefits of the subscription model make it enticing even for those who supposedly abhor it. And while it’s right to try to make it as efficient as possible, it will likely be with us for a long time to come.
General purpose technologies are broadly applicable, and when they double in effect like IT has been doing for decades, they can start taking fast tracts of land. Is there anything safe as we “Race Against the Machine?”
Does the future belong to the small and nimble, the flexible mid-range, or the large and powerful? The Chefs reflect on this question in our second installment of this monthly feature.
In my last posting, I posed four questions brought to my mind by the Aaron Swartz case. Here, I propose what I think are reasonable answers to those questions. The result is kind of a long post, but hey, it’s the weekend. Tell your spouse that the yard work will have to wait; you’re busy helping to solve the fundamental structural problems of the scholarly information marketplace.
Welcome to a new feature of the Scholarly Kitchen we’re calling “Ask the Chefs.” The premise is that each month, the Chefs (contributors) to the Scholarly Kitchen will answer a provocative question in a pithy paragraph or two. Each Chef answers the question without benefit of seeing the others’ responses. This month’s question: “What Do You Think Is the Most Important Trend in Publishing Today?”
This style of dancing takes such amazing body control, and it fits the music terrifically well. No film effects were used, but boy, does it look like they were in parts. It really starts getting amazing at about 1 minute. […]
It has become fashionable to rally against the elitism of journals and their editors. An economic argument for why we still need them both.
A pleasant way to celebrate Friday.
Ever seen your favorites stories in line-graph form?
The comments on a recent post revealed a litany of rhetoric that doesn’t quite match up with nuanced reality.
Boarding planes — can it be done quickly?
Not all conflicts are monetary. Sometimes, the pressure to do something good can lead to biased behavior.
An inflammatory essay reveals its author to be neither well-informed or fair.
A compelling essay points out some interesting wrinkles to the access debate.