DOCSLIB.ORG

Publishing with Open Access and Opensky

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Publishing with Open Access and Opensky Publishing with Open Access and OpenSky Carl Drews NCAR Earth System Laboratory American Geophysical Union – San Francisco, California December 16, 2010 NCAR is sponsored by the National Science Foundation NESL Presentation Format April 2010 Copyright 2010 by Carl Drews. distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 1 Master’s Thesis: Parting the Red Sea Figure 8 of Carl Drews and Weiqing Han, 2010 Dynamics of Wind Setdown at Suez and the Eastern Nile Delta. PLoS ONE 5(8): e12481. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012481 2 Where can I publish my thesis research? •Not a funded project; no money for page charges. •Is this: oceanography, meteorology, archaeology, history, coastal oceanography, biblical studies, numerical modeling, geology, or what? •I expect that there will be popular interest. 3 Great Popular Interest? Charlton Heston as Moses in The Ten Commandments (1956). Wikimedia Commons. A classic Hollywood movie, Bible stories, etc. 4 Frustrations with traditional publishing •Too slow. •Limited access. My friends can’t read my paper. •Out of scope for this journal. •Color and print charges (I want electronic-only). 5 Open Access Day – October 22, 2009 John Wilbanks: •Executive Director of Science Commons •Visionary Wikimedia Commons John Wilbanks and George Strawn said some crazy things that day, but I wrote them all down and thought about them for months afterwards . 6 . and concluded: •Open Access is perfect for this paper! •Inter-disciplinary research. •Popular interest. •I see the future, and it is Open Access. •The Open Access train has already left, and I’m not on it. •Somebody has already solved these problems. •I have to change my thinking! 7 PLoS ONE Aha! John Wilbanks had mentioned the science journal PLoS ONE in his talk. There are many other Open Access journals. http://www.plosone.org/ 8 About PLoS ONE •Impact factor: 4.351 for 2009. •Open Access, electronic only. Open Access? •Any topic within science or medicine. •No test for “Significance”; just good science. •Quick publication cycle. •Peer reviewed. •I thought peer review was open, but it is not. •Published by Public Library of Science since 2006. •Very strict about declaring your Competing Interests. •Cost: $1,350 regardless of article length, figures, color. •Published 4,406 articles in 2009 (17.6 per working day). •About 1,000 academic editors. •Several article metrics provided. •Creative Commons Attribution License. “Peer review requires organization, and organization costs money.” – John Wilbanks. PLoS ONE follows the “Author Pays” model. Discounts available. 9 Chalcolithic Footwear 10 Remains of St. Birgitta 11 Horned Dinosaurs 12 Peer Review and Manuscript Acceptance •Academic editor and two anonymous referees. •Knowledgeable and insightful comments. •Helpful and constructive suggestions. •Editor had extensive comments regarding formatting and scientific presentation. •Appropriate questions about uncertainty. •Focused on the scientific content of the manuscript. In short, the PLoS ONE review was everything a scientific peer review is supposed to be. Everything an NCAR internal review is. 13 Publication time: 5 months April 5, 2010: Submitted manuscript to PLoS ONE. April 9, 2010: PLoS ONE says to remove funding information and refer to Supplementary information in the text. April 12, 2010: I made the requested corrections and approved the revised manuscript file. June 17, 2010: PLoS ONE editor sends back requests for revisions. They look manageable. I have 60 days to respond. July 21, 2010: I submitted the revised manuscript, addressing the editor and reviewers' comments. August 3, 2010: The academic editor informs me that "your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLoS ONE." The files need to be checked by PLoS ONE production staff before formal acceptance. August 5, 2010: PLoS ONE requests minor changes to document formatting. August 6, 2010: I corrected the manuscript format and approved the merged PDF. There were other minor corrections over the following few days. August 11, 2010: Manuscript is "accepted for production"! August 23, 2010: PLoS ONE tells me that the publication date will be August 30, 2010. August 30, 2010: Paper is published. Basically: 2 months for peer review, 1 month for my revisions. Less than 1 month from acceptance to publication. 14 Publication! August 30, 2010 15 Daily Article Views Same readership pattern as the other articles: initial burst of excitement, then view count trails off. The initial burst is 5 days. Robots and web crawlers? Will my article make 1,000 views by the end of September 2010? 16 UCAR Media Relations Group David Hosansky Rachael Drummond Image: UCAR •Press release: September 21, 2010 •Illustration of the parting the sea. •Videos of the model results, and Carl explaining them. •Training for media interviews, guidance, handling inquiries. 17 NCAR Visualization & Enabling Technologies Section (VETS) Image: UCAR Don Middleton Tim Scheitlin Ryan McVeigh Image: UCAR and Nicolle Rager Fuller 18 OpenSky – NCAR Library 19 Press Release: September 21, 2010 Laura Snider is a reporter for the Boulder Daily Camera. Laura covered the publication of the Red Sea research. http://www.laurasnider.com/ This is still my favorite news story! 20 Media Frenzy! •A media frenzy erupted over September 21-23! (Tuesday-Thursday) •Web sites, TV camera crews, dozens of phone interviews, radio stations, TV stations… •5 phone interviews with the BBC in one night. •I missed some e-mail requests because I could not keep up. •International: Italy, Columbia, United Kingdom, Iran, Canada. •The story kept popping up on more web sites, hour by hour! •David Hosansky and Rachael Drummond scheduled interviews, filtered out some requests, advised me on tough questions, kept me calm and enthusiastic through those 3 days. Focus on the science. 21 ABC News 22 Fox 31 News 23 National Public Radio 24 International Coverage 25 Daily Article Views Same pattern of readership: Initial burst, then trails off. 13,678 views on September 23, 2010! The spike is only 4 days long. The pre-press release numbers are not even visible on these plots. Try a log scale . 26 Daily Article Views – log scale The UCAR press release occurred on day 22 after publication in PLoS ONE. Note the impact of the press release and media coverage on the article views. Suggest: Hard to get these numbers with limited access. 27 Impact of the UCAR Media Relations Group and VETS •Total views of the scientific article increased from 500 to over 35,000 in two weeks; a multiplicative factor of 70. •(Reached 32,000 by the end of September.) •Non-burst daily views increased from 10 per day to 30 per day; a factor of 3 increase over the longer term. 28 YouTube – NCAR/UCAR Channel Tim Scheitlin’s animation was a sensation! 534,793 views Video explanation: 57,249 views 29 Scholarly Attention Popular media coverage led to scholarly attention: •Invited speaker for Exodus conference in Italy. •Rotary Club of Pinerolo, province of Turin. •James Hoffmeier commented on my research. •Professor at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School •Respected biblical scholar and Egyptologist. •NCAR colleague Heba Marey is modeling air pollution in the Cairo basin, and heard about my project. •I gave her a terrain grid at 86-meter resolution. 30 Impact of Open Access Harder to quantify, but: •I would not expect 38,000 article views with limited access. •Blogs and comment boards reveal non-experts reading the original article and posting comments on it. •Easy to supply a URL to anyone, or a search phrase to find the article and read it! •Deposit final published version in OpenSky without restrictions or embargo. 31 Creative Commons Attribution License Includes commercial usage. 32 Re-post article with different styling http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2932978/ 33 Quote long sections and figures without my “permission” John Wilbanks says this is a good thing! http://www.science20.com/news_articles/parting_red_sea_could_it_have_happened_wind_setdown_model_says_yes 34 News Article Comments •Over 1,500 comments at CNN.com. •A lot of remarks by non-experts. •A few scholars in the bunch! •They try to educate the rest. •Some people have read the original paper. •Correct mistaken impressions. 35 Encouraging Stan Strickland Great! Send in the Archeologists! September 22, 2010 at 6:37 pm | Report abuse | Reply 36 Genuine Interest Bob On the other hand, during the 19th Century, before the Suez Canal was built, an Englishman discovered that there were parts of the Red Sea where you can ride across on horseback at low tide. So it could have been something like that, as well. And did the study account for changes to the hydrology of the Red Sea area caused by the construction of the Suez Canal? September 22, 2010 at 6:53 pm | Report abuse | Reply 37 Helpful stan turecki huxley – the wind doesnt have to HOLD UP the water – all it has to do is push it out of the way. it's the exact same principle as a storm surge associated with a hurricane. a 6ft storm surge from a cat 1 hurricane isnt unreasonable. September 22, 2010 at 11:56 am | Report abuse | Reply 38 Skeptical shawn Computer models don't mean squat, trash trash out, if they attempt this on a real scale modle it will FAIL September 22, 2010 at 7:58 pm | Report abuse | Reply 39 Irrelevant but amusing jersey born tom cruise did it September 22, 2010 at 8:15 am | Report abuse | Reply 40 Look up the original article! Thomas says: October 19, 2010 at 11:56 am Found this link – it gives greater detail about everythign Bill has already posted – maybe you wanna take a look into it and give some feedback? http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0012481 DagoodS says: October 19, 2010 at 3:15 pm Thomas, Thank you VERY much for the link.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Of Us Research Program Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI)
    All of Us Research Program Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Research Priorities Workshop June 24–25, 2019 Executive Summary The All of Us Research Program’s Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Research Priorities Workshop was held on June 24–25, 2019. The workshop convened ELSI professionals and All of Us participant ambassadors to help identify ELSI research opportunities using the All of Us Research Program, provide feedback on how to advance ELSI research by using the program and its data resources, and suggest ELSI-related research use cases.1 On Day 1, attendees received information on the program’s research platform, scientific framework and priorities, commitment to diversity, participant engagement strategy, data access and privacy policies, and new activities that are being planned. They also received a demonstration of the All of Us public data browser. Attendees then divided into working groups organized around three themes: (1) genomics; (2) social determinants of health; and (3) legal, regulatory, and policy issues. In these groups, attendees participated in a facilitated activity where they discussed and recorded ELSI research questions of interest and the data needed to answer them, including data with planned availability through the program’s Research Hub. During an open discussion on Day 2, attendees raised significant concerns about the structure of Day 1 and asserted that the program could make better use of their deep and varied expertise by reframing the workshop to allow for exploration of some important ELSI considerations that the program raises, including protecting participants’ rights and privacy and ensuring that participants have a real voice in the program.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fool's Errand
    COMMENT by the madness of mobs. Will a crowd- sourced scholarship be dominated by pro- vocative pap that fills without nourishing? Here we must recall first that schol- arship has always been a community MONROE BRENDAN enterprise, driven by building consen- sus among experts10. So the question is not ‘Should we crowdsource?’ but ‘How should we crowdsource?’. Second, we must dispose of the straw-man argument that hundreds of uninformed readers’ opinions will count for more than one Fields medallist’s recommendation. Authority and expertise are central in the Web era as they were in the journal era. The difference is that whereas the paper- based system used subjective criteria to identify authoritative voices, the Web- based one assesses authority recursively from the entire community. We now have a unique opportunity as scholars to guide the evolution of our tools in directions that honour our val- ues and benefit our communities. Here’s what to do. First, try new things: publish new kinds of products, share them in new places and brag about them using new metrics. Intellectual playfulness is a core scholarly virtue. Second, take risks (another scholarly virtue): publishing more papers may be safe, but scholars who establish early leadership in Web- native production will be ahead of the curve as these genres become dominant. A fool’s errand Finally, resist the urge to cling to the trap- pings of scientific excellence rather than Objections to the Creative Commons attribution excellence itself. ‘Publication’ is just one mode of making public and one way of licence are straw men raised by parties who want open validating scholarly excellence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fourth Paradigm
    ABOUT THE FOURTH PARADIGM This book presents the first broad look at the rapidly emerging field of data- THE FOUR intensive science, with the goal of influencing the worldwide scientific and com- puting research communities and inspiring the next generation of scientists. Increasingly, scientific breakthroughs will be powered by advanced computing capabilities that help researchers manipulate and explore massive datasets. The speed at which any given scientific discipline advances will depend on how well its researchers collaborate with one another, and with technologists, in areas of eScience such as databases, workflow management, visualization, and cloud- computing technologies. This collection of essays expands on the vision of pio- T neering computer scientist Jim Gray for a new, fourth paradigm of discovery based H PARADIGM on data-intensive science and offers insights into how it can be fully realized. “The impact of Jim Gray’s thinking is continuing to get people to think in a new way about how data and software are redefining what it means to do science.” —Bill GaTES “I often tell people working in eScience that they aren’t in this field because they are visionaries or super-intelligent—it’s because they care about science The and they are alive now. It is about technology changing the world, and science taking advantage of it, to do more and do better.” —RhyS FRANCIS, AUSTRALIAN eRESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE COUNCIL F OURTH “One of the greatest challenges for 21st-century science is how we respond to this new era of data-intensive
    [Show full text]
  • The Machine That Would Predict the Future
    TECHNOLOGY SPECIAL REPORT The Machine That Would Predic t the If you dropped all the world’s data into a black box, could it become a crystal ball that Futurewould let you see the future—even test what would happen if you chose A over B? One researcher thinks so, and he could soon get a billion euros to build it By David Weinberger In the summer and fall of last year, the Greek financial crisis tore at the seams of the global economy. Having run up a debt that it would never be able to repay, the country faced a number of poten- tial outcomes, all unpleasant. Efforts to slash spending spurred riots in the streets of Athens, while threats of default rattled global financial markets. Many economists argued that Greece should leave the euro zone and devalue its currency, a move that would in theory help the economy grow. “Make no mistake: an orderly euro exit will be hard,” wrote New York Universi- ty economist Nouriel Roubini in the Financial Times. “But watching the slow disorderly implo- sion of the Greek economy and society will be much worse.” No one was sure exactly how the scenario would play out, limit the spread of infectious disease. Altered trade routes could though. Fear spread that if Greece were to abandon the euro, disrupt native ecosystems. The question itself is simple— Spain and Italy might do the same, weakening the central bond Should Greece drop the euro?—but the potential fallout is so of the European Union. Yet the Economist opined that the crisis far-reaching and complex that even the world’s sharpest minds would “bring more fiscal-policy control from Brussels, turning found themselves unable to grasp all the permutations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legal Framework for Reproducible Scientific Research Licensing and Copyright
    R EPRODUCIBLE RESEARCH The Legal Framework for Reproducible Scientific Research Licensing and Copyright As computational researchers increasingly make their results available in a reproducible way, questions naturally arise regarding copyright, subsequent use and citation, and ownership rights in general. The author proposes the Reproducible Research Standard for all components of scientific researchers’ scholarship, which should encourage replicable scientific investigation through attribution, the facilitation of greater collaboration, and the promotion of the engagement of the larger community in scientific learning and discovery. n the US, when scientists put their original computational work because researchers often research on the Web, it automatically falls need more than just the published article to re- under copyright. However, copyright is produce the results. an unsuitable legal structure for scientific Although this trend seems to be changing, the Iworks. Scientific norms guide scientists to repro- typical journal publishing format doesn’t allow for duce and build on others’ research, and default transmission of supporting files such as accom- copyright law by its very purpose runs counter panying images, source code, or demonstrations to these goals. In this article, I present a meth- of work to interested readers—although some odology for scientists to rescind copyright from journals are beginning to require that code or their work in such a way that it realigns scientific data be released as a precondition for publication, information sharing with long-established scien- (for example, Nature [www.nature.com/authors/ tific norms. editorial_policies/availability.html], The Insight Journal [www.insight-journal.org], and Annals of Options for Researchers Internal Medicine [www.annals.org/cgi/content/ Computational research is becoming more per- full/0000605-200703200-00154v1]).
    [Show full text]
  • Another Reason for Opening Access to Research
    Downloaded from bmj.com on 16 February 2007 Another reason for opening access to research John Wilbanks BMJ 2006;333;1306-1308 doi:10.1136/sbmj.39063.730660.F7 Updated information and services can be found at: http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7582/1306 These include: Rapid responses 3 rapid responses have been posted to this article, which you can access for free at: http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7582/1306#responses You can respond to this article at: http://bmj.com/cgi/eletter-submit/333/7582/1306 Email alerting Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article - sign up in the service box at the top left of the article Notes To order reprints follow the "Request Permissions" link in the navigation box To subscribe to BMJ go to: http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/subscribers Downloaded from bmj.com on 16 February 2007 Inspiration Another reason for opening access to research John Wilbanks Science Commons Much of the debate about open access has focused on Project, Creative Commons, c/o the principle of access for scientists and the economics Massachusetts of such a change. There is a second principle to Institute of consider: the full power of new technological Technology Computer Science approaches such as text mining, collaborative filtering, and Artificial and semantic indexing, are not resulting in powerful Intelligence new public resources. Despite real success in the open Laboratory, Cambridge, MA access movement, most scholarly research is unavailable, 02127, USA either for study or for processing by software. wilbanks@ creativecommons.org According to the Budapest open access initiative, John Wilbanks “There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier executive director access to this literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Tweets from the Trans-NIH Workshop to Explore the Ethical, Legal And
    Trans-NIH Workshop to Explore the Ethical, Legal and Social Implications (ELSI) of Citizen Science #CitSciELSI Tweets January 13-14, 2015 Date Screen Name User Name Tweet Text 1/16/2015 4:13:30 @NCIPhySci NCI PhysicalSciences The #CitSciELSI workshop has been storified! http://t.co/6CHPksBUkU via @storify RT @CCPHconference: Hope you'll continue the #CitSciELSI conversation in #Canada this spring! @cuexpo 1/16/2015 2:57:48 @CUEUVic CUE UVic http://t.co/TRgq3ioHYg #CBPR #engaged… MT @CitSciAssoc: Concerned about #publichealth? Check out these #citizenscience sessions at #CitSci2015 1/15/2015 23:07:56 @CCPH2010 CCPH http://t.co/Z9wxqjcHoB #CitSciELSI Concerned about #publichealth? Sessions about role of #citizenscience in #communityhealth at #CitSci2015 1/15/2015 22:30:14 @CitSciAssoc CitSciAssoc http://t.co/pasVrGCIFX #CitSciELSI RT @engagedethics: Let's keep sharing #CitSciELSI resources, like this blogspot (thanks @CoopSciScoop for 1/15/2015 20:39:44 @JackieJCreedon Jackie James-Creedon workshop tweets). http://t.co/avD… RT @engagedethics: Let's keep sharing #CitSciELSI resources, like this blogspot (thanks @CoopSciScoop for 1/15/2015 19:08:51 @CoopSciScoop Caren Cooper workshop tweets). http://t.co/avD… RT @HealthcareWen: Jan13-4 webcast: Ethical-Legal-Social Implications of CITIZEN SCIENCE 1/15/2015 18:52:49 @AlisynGayle Alisyn Gayle http://t.co/nils5MhgJ5 #CitSciELSI @genome_gov @ST… RT @CCPH2010: Ah ha! There IS a Journal of Negative Results! http://t.co/kjBXTUCfHx @AndreaWiggins 1/15/2015 12:23:30 @KTAustralia Tamika Heiden #CitSciELSI #research RT @CitSciAssoc: Re-imagining #CitizenScience: Knowledge for #equality? New #citsci2015 blog post! 1/15/2015 9:42:13 @nmdammann Nancy M.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainability 2010, 2, 993-1015; Doi:10.3390/Su2040993 OPEN ACCESS Sustainability ISSN 2071-1050
    Sustainability 2010, 2, 993-1015; doi:10.3390/su2040993 OPEN ACCESS sustainability ISSN 2071-1050 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Article Science, Open Communication and Sustainable Development John T. Wilbanks 1 and Thomas J. Wilbanks 2,* 1 Science Commons, c/o Creative Commons, 71 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 2 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, P.O. Box 2008, MS-6038, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-865-574-5515; Fax: +1-865-576-2943. Received: 1 February 2010; in revised form: 19 March 2010 / Accepted: 22 March 2010 / Published: 13 April 2010 Abstract: One of the prerequisites for sustainable development is knowledge, in order to inform coping with sustainability threats and to support innovative sustainability pathways. Transferring knowledge is therefore a fundamental challenge for sustainability, in a context where external knowledge must be integrated with local knowledge in order to promote user-driven action. But effective local co-production of knowledge requires ongoing local access to existing scientific and technical knowledge so that users start on a level playing field. The information technology revolution can be a powerful enabler of such access if intellectual property obstacles can be overcome, with a potential to transform prospects for sustainability in many parts of the world. Keywords: knowledge for sustainability; co-production of knowledge for sustainability; information technology; open access 1. Introduction Sustainable development across the regions, systems, and populations of this world is a path, not a state [1]. The challenges to sustainability evolve constantly, as changes in conditions and driving forces emerge with little notice.
    [Show full text]
  • OPEN ACCESS February 2015 Member Update
    SPARC February 2015 Member Update In mid-2013, SPARC ventured into uncharted waters and launched a new program focused on raising campus awareness of a burgeoning set of teaching and learning materials called Open Educational Resources (OERs). While a handful of libraries were active in this area, awareness across many others was low. For many, the idea of OERs simply evoked images of free textbooks and was dismissed as an issue primarily of interest to the campus bookstore. For others, the term conjured up the specter of MOOCs, and was passed over as an area for faculty and administrators to wrangle. What a difference a year (and a half) makes! Over the past 18 months, we’ve witnessed a transformation in the library community’s role in promoting the understanding of Open Educational Resources, and how their creation and adoption can benefit our campuses. SPARC members have hosted numerous awareness raising events for faculty, students and administrators. Our members have created a new educational network (The SPARC OER & Libraries Forum) to share ideas, best practices and resources related to OER. For the first time, the 2014 annual international Open Education Conference had an entire track devoted to libraries and interest. As we get ready to mark Open Education Week next month, expect to see this trend continue to grow - and look for new SPARC-supported opportunities for your library to get involved in promoting OERs. HJ - Heather Joseph, Executive Director, SPARC OpOenPEN ACCESS Access Two Federal Agencies Release Public Access Plans Over the course of the past several weeks, two federal agencies, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ) released their plans to provide public access to articles and data resulting from their funded research.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdsourcing the Global Scientific Community Around Therapeutic Intellectual Properties
    Crowdsourcing the Global Scientific Community Around Therapeutic Intellectual Properties. Jerome Hamilton, CEO [email protected] +1.651.900.0412 PO Box 30085 Cincinnati, OH 45230, USA Website: https://OpenTherapeutics.org Twitter: https://twitter.com/opentherapeutic LinkedIN: https://www.linkedin.com/company/open-therapeutics/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/OpenTherapeuticsTherapoid Telegram: https://t.me/OpenTherapeutics April 12, 18 © 2018 Open Therapeutics, LLC. All rights reserved. Trademarks Therapoid platform™ will be a registered trademark of Open Therapeutics, LLC (“Open Therapeutics” or “Open Therapeutics”). Helix will be a registered trademark of Knowbella Tech, LLC. “The Currency of Science™” will be a registered trademark of Knowbella Tech, LLC. “The Scientific Currency™” will be a registered trademark of Knowbella Tech, LLC. All other trademarks or registered trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. Disclaimer The information provided in this document is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Open Therapeutics disclaims all warranties, either express or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall Open Therapeutics be liable for any damages whatsoever including direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, loss of business profits or special damages, even if Open Therapeutics or its suppliers have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Document Lifetime Open Therapeutics may occasionally update online documentation between releases of the related software. Consequently, if this document was not downloaded recently, it may not contain the most up-to-date information. Please refer to https://OpenTherapeutics.org for the most current information. From the Web site, you may also download and refresh this document if it has been updated, as indicated by a change in this date: April 12, 18.
    [Show full text]
  • Dna Lab Sacked for Misconduct
    The world this week News in brief IRAN TAKES PIVOTAL UK GOVERNMENT NUCLEAR STEP CALL FOR SCIENCE Iran has announced that it ‘WEIRDOS’ PROMPTS will no longer abide by any CAUTION restrictions on its uranium- enrichment programme, Researchers have reacted with prompting fears that the 2015 surprise to a bizarrely worded deal to limit the country’s job advertisement posted by a nuclear activities is effectively senior UK government adviser. dead. Experts say that if Iran The notice calls for scientists, resumes enrichment at full SCI-HUB PROBED mathematicians and “super- throttle, it could be capable talented weirdos” to work for of creating a nuclear bomb in FOR ALLEGED the prime minister, and cites one year. LINKS TO RUSSIAN several scientific papers. The step is widely seen as INTELLIGENCE Dominic Cummings a response to the 3 January (pictured), a political strategist US drone strike on Baghdad that The operator of Sci-Hub, a who is chief special adviser to killed visiting Iranian military website that provides people Prime Minister Boris Johnson, commander Qasem Soleimani, worldwide with illicit access to posted the advertisement on his the architect of Iran’s military a large volume of copyright- personal website on 2 January. operations around the world. protected academic literature, Cummings, known for his strong Iran struck the 2015 nuclear is reportedly being investigated and sometimes controversial deal, the Joint Comprehensive by the US Department of Justice views on science, says that he is Plan of Action (JCPOA), with six (DOJ) on suspicion of stealing seeking “data scientists, project global powers on the condition US military secrets.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Commons Whitepaper Launch
    H E A L T H C O M M O N S THERAPY DEVELOPMENT IN A NETWORKED WORLD INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW MARTY TENENBAUM AND JOHN WILBANKS May 2008 S c i e n c e C o m m o n s c . o M I T C S A I L , B u i l d i n g 3 2 - 3 8 6 D , C a m b r i d g e M A 0 2 1 3 9 • w w w. h e a l t h c o m m o n s . n e t Drug Discovery: Time for a Change The pharmaceutical industry is at a crossroads. Despite revolutionary advances in molecular biology that have made genetic decoding routine, the time from gene to cure still stands at 17 years. High-throughput screening methods allow us to test the efficacy of millions of compounds against a molecular target in a single week; but the odds of one of those compounds making it through the development pipeline and becoming a drug are less than 1/1,000,000. A well-funded group starting today, using the traditional model of drug development, has a very slim chance at getting a drug to market by 2025. The time has come to change the way we cure disease. We are no longer asking whether a gene or a molecule is critical to a particular biological process; rather, we are discovering whole networks of molecular and cellular interactions that contribute to disease. And soon, we will have such information about individuals, rather than the population as a whole.
    [Show full text]