Watching the Winds — Breezy and Revealing Visualizations of Our Most Common Weather Companion
Science data can be beautiful.
Science data can be beautiful.
Claims that technological innovations can smash cultures and revolutionize the fundamentals of scientific communication mistake superficial changes for deep changes. Technology alone isn’t enough. In fact, it seems that publishing changes technology.
Google’s new “Scholar Metrics” promise to make the h-index viable for journals on a large scale. But problems exist in their approach, some of them easily handled, some not.
A PLoS ONE article recently went viral, hitting the front page of Reddit and garnering an amazing amount of reader interest. This was great news for the journal and the paper’s authors, but raises questions for the notion of post-publication […]
In my previous posting, I focused on what I believe to be dim prospects for the Encyclopedia Britannica as it transforms from a set of printed volumes into a networked online information portal. My skepticism stems from the fact that […]
The current crop of ebooks simply don’t do many of the things that scholars require, leading scholars to urge libraries to continue to collect print books. Perhaps a new kind of service is required to get more scholars to migrate to all-digital solutions.
UKSG Coverage – The Future of Scholarly Journals: slow evolution, rapid transformation – or redundancy? @CameronNeylon and @Michael_Mabe debate at #UKSGlive
Did the Encyclopedia Britannica stop printing because of the limitations of print? Or is there something more pernicious at the roots of Britannica’s problems?
Scott Berkun challenges a common assumption — that being innovative is desirable. Instead, he suggests other things to be, including clear, smart, and savvy.
Post-publication peer-review systems are still something fancied here and there. But with comments failing on blogs everywhere, especially as traffic grows, more bloggers are talking about new approaches — ones that focus on invited experts, quality opinions, and high standards. Where have we heard that before?
Should search engines license content for crawling? A potential German law thinks so.
A new report for the Center of Economic Development suffers from a strong bias in its authorship. But beyond that, its implicit complaints, if addressed completely, would lead to a trainwreck in the world of scholarly communication. Is nobody thinking these things through?
We used to have editorial selection and ordering as a natural result of editorial control. With algorithms and news feeds dominating, where are the signals of priority and linked information? Did we really need the packaging?
The transformation of all publishers is underway, and this interview from a popular magazine’s editor sounds all too familiar as we adapt to evolving markets, possibilities, and expectations.
Amazon’s power in book publishing continues to grow, gaining momentum naturally as its success makes failure more likely for incumbents. There’s a lot to respect in what they’re doing.