[open-science] OKF: What shall I say at the Open Science Summit in Berkeley

[William L. Anderson]

Michael Nielsen wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Cameron Neylon wrote:
> 
>> Of course, as you point out, most projects have no technical return
>> path at all and that is something that is measurable. What sort of
>> standards and expectations would be appropriate to build in there?
>> What is appropriate for different kinds of projects (with different
>> issues around privacy/security/time availability?). Is there a minimal
>> standard?
> 
> In many, perhaps most cases a cleaned up version of my question is, I
> think, clear enough: does the project (1) offer substantive ways for
> non-professionals to contribute to the science, and also (2) encourage
> that involvement?
> 
> For most scientific projects the answer is a clear "no".  For arXiv the
> answer is also "no".  For Galaxy Zoo etc the answer is a clear "yes".
> I'd be interested if anyone knows offhand what the policies for
> deposition are at places like GenBank.  I wouldn't be surprised if the
> big databases are all over the place on this issue, with the answer
> often being that (1) is possible in principle, but that the answer to
> part (2) is "no".  So they don't satisfy the criterion.
> 


In terms of measurement it is better to describe the kind of behavior we
want from each other in terms of open, multi-way communications, and
look for ways of measuring that. In some sense it is irrelevant what my
attitude is, as long as I behave in acceptable ways.

What metrics can we use to measure "encourage involvement"? This has two
parts to be measured; viz., "encouragement" and "involvement". What are
the properties of "involvement" that can be automatically measured?

If Galazy Zoo is a clear "yes"; then how is that answer determined? Can
it be determined automatically, or can part of that answer be determined
automatically? [I believe so.] Is there a necessary subjective
evaluation needed?

An answer to how Galaxy Zoo gets a "yes" and arXiv a "no" is the basis
for establishing criteria for other projects.


> [ ... ]

-Bill Anderson
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5299 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20100707/4307bc64/attachment-0003.bin>