The current uproar over artificial intelligence does not show us what the future of AI will look like, but rather how a human population falls into predictable patterns as it contemplates any new development: we are observing not AI but ourselves observing AI.
What might the recent backlash to revelations about how Facebook was exploited mean for the scholarly ecosystem?
Why would a for-profit, VC funded publisher celebrate by committing itself to a full year’s worth of additional expenses with no additional revenue?
Silicon Valley’s advertising model has been exploited, and free information’s price is more apparent. Will we be saved by subscription model innovations?
Franklin Foer’s new book is a bracing account of the current information economy, the monopolies and motivations at its heart, and the weakening of democratized knowledge.
As we’ve absorbed and adopted the information economy assumptions peddled by Silicon Valley, social isolation has increased, the definition of “fact” has become slippery, and the scientific record has become more superficial, less reliable, and more transitory. In fact, confirmation bias seems to have become our main operating principle. Maybe a change in economic incentives and greater skepticism across the board could help — all driven by more humans at the controls.
Should the fast and loose rules of startup company business models and the spin-oriented language of advertising be given free rein in the scholarly community?
Data sharing and publication is a topic we need to consider carefully, and weigh the risks, costs, and benefits, as well as the complexities.
As consumers, we are often seduced by the apparent simplicity of the products we use. This can lead us to believe that products are as easy to make as they are to consume — and that is a mistake.
The recent sale of Mendeley exposed surprisingly naive perspectives on the company’s clear and inherent goals. Other venture capital plays are afoot in scientific publishing and academia. When will we stop being the prey?
PeerJ is bringing something new to scholarly publishing, but it’s not a business model or a technology approach — it’s a mindset.
Musicians have learned that the new corporate powers — technology companies — are possibly worse than the old corporate powers — record companies. How well would technology companies treat academics?
Does the power of prestige and prestige-granting organization confound the politics of the Web?