[open-science] the early-career guide to doing open science?

Fri Mar 16 17:51:01 UTC 2012

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Stacy Konkiel <stacy.konkiel at gmail.com>wrote:

> Peter, you're absolutely right re: universities and their resources. I
> was definitely looking at this is a uni context, when it's much
> broader than that.
>
> Many unis, though, are becoming increasingly interested in creating
> tools and programs for the larger community/ies. Perhaps a strategy
> similar to one that Puneet suggests--larger IRs backing smaller, more
> agile teams that create a data repo serving a niche community--could
> be the way to move forward (and with the OKF providing strategies for
> doing so).
>

This is part of the crux. Public libraries look to their community.
National libraries look to their community. University libraries ought to
and generally don't. You mentioned IU - I know IU very well - we have even
had joint grant applications with David Wild, Geoff Fox, etc.

So shouldn't IU have a responsibility to look after the needs of the state
of Indiana? (the same could be said of Cambridge, I suppose, as it's in the
Albertian tradition). But universities look inwards when they should be
reaching out in a digital age. Why should I get to read the STM literature
and not most of the people at the OKF Data group in the Panton two weeks
ago. Some really powerful intellects and experience could be liberated.

So a C21 model would be for Nation (libraries, funders) to combine with
Open expertise (maybe univs, but much outside) to make these resources
available for all. The robber baron Carnegie built the public library
system in the US - we have enough robber barons now who might have
consciences? But, unfortunately, companies don't have consciences.

On other points - yes, we let commercial orgs like Figshare, Google,
Mendeley manage our resources at our peril. But that's the Faustian
bargain. Universities SHOULD have a role here but they are gazing at their
hIndex navels instead of building the C21. The orgs I trust are public ones
with momentum, funding however small, and democratic DNA. They will be the
successes of our time.

Assuming we aren't all subsumed into a SOPA-like Ministry of Truth.

>
> I'd advocate strongly for partnering with "public trusts" such as
> gov't bodies, national libraries, or universities to provide the
> infrastructure for any kind of amateur data storage utility, though,
> as leaving it in the hands of commerce to provide solutions could lead
> to "closed" data. Look what happened with the scholarly journal
> system. :)
>
>
> - Stacy
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk>
> wrote:
> > This is a really valuable discussion. Some quick points:
> >
> > Not everyone is in a University. Those outside are immediately part of
> the
> > #scholarlypoor. The solution "talk to your institutional repo" is no use
> for
> > people in an institution
> > Some IRs are suitable for data. Australia has got its act together
> (TARDIS,
> > etc.) But in (say) UK there are probably 100-300 institutions and what
> they
> > offer is very variable.
> > I suggested OKF because (a) they have several years of running the CKAN
> repo
> > (b) they have good relations with funders in Europe, especially things
> like
> > Europeana. (c) they have good relations with gov.* I wasn't suggesting a
> > huge data fortress in Panton Street - that's why I suggested BL
> > Dryad deals with some aspects of evolution
> > Sourceforge and its descendants have made software available to the
> masses.
> > We need the same attitude and provision for data. Not all software is
> > created in universities and nor is all data.
> >
> > I am not suggesting etabytes but I can certainly see the value of public
> > storage for data in - say - amateur (in the bestb sense of the world)
> > astronomy, ornithology, land use, meterology, oceanography - whatever.
> > Whether it's from the national purse or commerce - who knows.
> >
> > And if the country is crying out for data mungers (as OKF suggests) then
> > this is a really cost-effective investment in on-th-job-training. After
> all
> > we are running a virtual course on data , aren't we?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Peter Murray-Rust
> > Reader in Molecular Informatics
> > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> > University of Cambridge
> > CB2 1EW, UK
> > +44-1223-763069
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > open-science mailing list
> > open-science at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> >
>

-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20120316/5a21cc1f/attachment-0001.html>