Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new (50 items) |
- Searching Deeply for Data, Results and Tools- What is Stopping Us?
- There is a pathetic lack of functionality in scholarly publishing. We must end for-profit publishing and allow libraries to make available the works of their scholars for all
- Hypothes.is | The Internet, peer reviewed.
- Openness Shock: Are We Mice or Are We Academics?
- Critics not satisfied after public access to doc discipline database is restored
- Opening peer review may increase accuracy
- PLoS Expands Mission | PLoS
- Why Pearson’s OpenClass Is a Big Deal
| Searching Deeply for Data, Results and Tools- What is Stopping Us? Posted: 10 Nov 2011 07:17 AM PST |
| Posted: 10 Nov 2011 07:12 AM PST Impact of Social Sciences, (09 Nov 2011) "In other words, not only do publicly funded scientists and science suffer, the taxpayer is even lining the pockets of the international shareholders who are holding them hostage....And this brings me to the point why scholarly publishing can be saved: depending on what sources you use and which profits are counted, the for-profit scholarly publishing sector rakes in an annual profit of anywhere between 2 and 4 billion Euros in largely taxpayer funds. This is more than enough money not only to make all the publicly funded research accessible to the taxpayer that funded it, but there would be plenty left to invest in infrastructure to develop a smart alerting service where I would spend one hour a week searching for the literature and ten hours reading it. There would be money left over to invest in archiving strategies to make scholarly knowledge last beyond financial catastrophes. There would be a completely new sense of purpose bestowed on the one institution that has hundreds and hundreds of years of experience in archiving scholarly output and making it accessible: the university library...." |
| Hypothes.is | The Internet, peer reviewed. Posted: 10 Nov 2011 06:46 AM PST hypothes.is "Hypothes.is will be a distributed, open-source platform for the collaborative evaluation of information. It will enable [OA] sentence-level critique of written words combined with a sophisticated yet easy-to-use model of community peer-review. It will work as an overlay on top of any stable content, including news, blogs, scientific articles, books, terms of service, ballot initiatives, legislation and regulations, software code and more-without requiring participation of the underlying site. It is based on a new draft standard for annotating digital documents currently being developed by the Open Annotation Collaboration, a consortium that includes the Internet Archive, NISO (National Information Standards Organization), O'Reilly Books, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and a number of academic institutions...." |
| Openness Shock: Are We Mice or Are We Academics? Posted: 10 Nov 2011 06:35 AM PST intechweb.wordpress.com "A link to an article stood out among the Berlin9 tweets rush yesterday during the Harold Varmus presentation. Varmus, a director of the US National Cancer Institute, pointed to a piece by Murray et al. from 2008, Of Mice and Academics: Examining the Effect of Openness on Innovation. Although the article dates back to 2008, the cost of intellectual property and the limits that IP rights may place on the diversity research, remain neglected. The idea of Murray et al. was that “within academia, restrictions on scientific openness, such as those created by formal intellectual property, may limit the diversity and experimentation of basic research itself.” How the openness presents a shock in a world where researchers have control rights on their research activities and what has this all to do with mice, is explained in a following experiment...." |
| Critics not satisfied after public access to doc discipline database is restored Posted: 10 Nov 2011 05:34 AM PST www.modernhealthcare.com |
| Opening peer review may increase accuracy Posted: 09 Nov 2011 07:08 PM PST |
| Posted: 09 Nov 2011 07:07 PM PST www.plos.org "Given the broad front along which PLoS is progressing, the PLoS staff and Board of Directors have developed a revised mission that builds on PLoS’s successes and reflects our aspirations. That mission is summarized as “accelerating progress in science and medicine by leading a transformation in research communication.” The mission also includes aims in three specific areas, which are to: [1] Eliminate unnecessary barriers to immediate availability, access, and use of research, [2] Pursue a publishing strategy that drives openness, quality, and integrity, [3] Develop innovative approaches to the assessment, organization, and reuse of ideas and data...." |
| Why Pearson’s OpenClass Is a Big Deal Posted: 09 Nov 2011 08:21 AM PST |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment