There is a danger that this kind of thing comes across as ‘everything should be pd [pubic domain] but when my mate copyrights something and you violate it I will jump down your throat’.
This would be a problem, and would probably lead to our results being regarded as unreliable.
Just a brief thought prompted by two, partly related, things streaming past my nose. Firstly Michael Nielsen discussed the views of Aristotle and Sunstein on collective intelligence.
I’m not quite sure exactly what was the reason but there was a recent flare-up of the good old “how much does it cost to publish a scholarly article” discussion recently.
The point of more complete release of record is to enable a diversity of critique and contribution via more diverse communication modes.
The observant reader will note that I’ve conflated two different clubs already. One is the club of subscribers to a journal. The second is the club of members of a particular library.
Most researchers are going to reach for the web and search. And the resources I could find are woeful as a whole. Many of them are incomprehensible, even to me. But worse, virtually none of them are actually directed at my specific use case.
I had a dream, which was not all a dream.
This is the first pass at an introductory chapter for a book I’ve had in my head to work on for a long time.
This post is aiming to get down some thoughts around how the superset of evolutionary models can be framed. It’s almost certainly work that has been done somewhere before but I’m struggling to find it so it seemed useful to lay out what I’m looking for.
In the specific case here we’re talking about an identifiable image of a child, where the parents had apparently given permission for the image to appear “in a scientific journal” but hadn’t realised that this would be widely available.
The idea of wearing one has suddenly resurfaced in the wake of the U.S. election.
Amongst all the hot takes, the disbelief and the angst the question many of us are asking is what to actually do.
There’s an article doing the rounds today about public understanding and rejection of experts and expertise.
Eventually a situation is reached where the original problem and its descendants are dead, but the fact lives on through a great variety of standardized versions, thrown off at different stages of its evolution, and themsleves undergoing constant change in response to that of their uses.
A small percentage of the blacklisted publishers were ever properly documented by Beall.