A New Kind of Science?

books & arts A new kind of science?

Reinventing an opportunity to progress more rapidly, professionals, but also by discovering a Discovery: The New but also that it has lost its way since that whole new class of galaxy themselves. Era of Networked earlier Golden Age in which alchemists and Considering his stated incendiary Science blood-letters began sharing their findings ambitions, Nielsen’s descriptions are in the free and collaborative spirit in which measured and prosaic. Until the last few by Michael Nielsen modern science was born. pages, this book does not read like a call to But Nielsen reminds us that it was ever arms, and nowhere is it excessively polemical. PRINCETON UNIV. thus. The natural state of the researcher is Only occasionally does he seem to lose his PRESS: 2011. 280 PP. one of extreme possessiveness, and it was temper — for example, when describing the £17.95 / $25.95 only through the cajoling of glory-seeking “ludicrous” discrepancy between the volume patrons like the Medicis and persistent of online scientific comment and that on editors such as Henry Oldenburg — the the subject of Pokémon products. Indeed, founding editor of the Philosophical sometimes he ought to be more forthright, ike so many fields of human activity, Transactions of the Royal Society — that such as when debating the benefits of open science is in the midst of a digital they shared anything at all. Over a period research in combating science scepticism and Lrevolution. Yet the changes we have of decades, confidential notebooks were misleading journalism. seen so far are no more than a prelude, with finally prised open and it became accepted Yet this is not a dry book. Nielsen’s much bigger ones still to come. Researchers that researchers would share their findings evident enthusiasm — he gave up a have generally been slow to embrace new with each other through the published promising research career in quantum technologies and practices, and this new journals. Indeed, this became the one true computing to become an ambassador for era of networked science will only reach route to continued funding, job security and this cause — shines through, and he has its potential when it becomes more open, professional respectability. But as Nielsen taken great care to make his explanations necessitating new incentive structures and points out, this marvellously successful both readable and accessible, aims in which a culture of openness throughout research. incentive structure now constitutes an he succeeds well. He also articulates some Those, in short, are Michael Nielsen’s enormous barrier to change. Many are the useful concepts, such as the increasing messages. His stated aim is to encourage ways in which the modern Internet-enabled significance of data-driven intelligence (as this transition by “lighting an almighty researcher can contribute to the broader distinct from traditional human intelligence) fire under the scientific community” to enterprise — by generating data, writing and the critical importance of realigning inspire “a second open science revolution”. software or otherwise applying their own individual researchers’ interests with the For although this book is ostensibly about particular expertise — without necessarily collective interest of research as a whole. science in the Internet age, it is equally a publishing a paper. But if papers are the Inevitably, there are a few flaws. He manifesto for openness in research. Is he only contributions that convey credit then perpetuates the all-too-common injustice right, and will he succeed? In my opinion, to work towards any other end is at best a of giving credit to the Public Library of yes and maybe. waste of time and at worst career-limiting. Science for promoting author-pays open- The world of twenty-first-century Modern science, with its obsession for access publishing while failing to mention research is replete with examples of secrecy publishing and individual credit, sometimes BioMed Central, which was the original and resistance to change. At a recent seems like a football team in which the only innovator of that approach. Also, some of summit on open data, I listened to a senior thought of each player on receiving the the descriptions, though wonderfully clear, scientist plead with her more progressive ball is to run directly for the goal. How to could have been tighter, and for my taste colleagues to be reasonable. She had spent achieve the greater degree of specialization, there are too many exclamation marks! years gathering her data and it would be cooperation and trust that twenty-first- But these are quibbles. In writing this unfair for anyone to expect her to share it. century science demands? book, Nielsen has created perhaps the No one proved combative enough to point Nielsen’s principle tactic is to present most compelling and comprehensive case out that her work had been done for money, a raft of success stories from inside and so far for a new approach to science in the not charity, and that she owed it to her outside science (along with a few failures, Internet age. Those of us who are devoting employer — the scientific establishment — for they hold lessons as well). To anyone our careers to furthering this aim will be to do whatever was best for furthering its who has been following this topic closely, encouraged by his convincing analysis goals. The irony was not lost on me as I sat many of them will be familiar, from even while despairing at his suggestion that there, a businessman among academics, that open-source software to the Human this may be a 50-year, rather than a 2-year, anyone expressing such a self-serving and Genome Project and the Sloan Digital Sky endeavour. As with scientific research itself, uncooperative attitude within a commercial Survey. But even those who have heard Nielsen admits that “[t]his will be long, slow organization would be out on their ear. the headlines before will find important work”. But even if we are in for a hard grind Yet in science, this is somehow not merely and interesting details, such as the way in then at least we have something eloquent, tolerated, but accepted as normal and even which the Linux kernel was modularized thought-provoking and inspiring to read. ❐ inevitable. Faced with such antediluvian to support greater decentralization, or the attitudes among otherwise sensible and well- story behind the amateurs who contributed REVIEWED BY TIMO HANNAY meaning people, it is easy to despair — to to the Galaxy Zoo project not only by Timo Hannay is Managing Director of feel not only that science is squandering classifying astronomical images for the Digital Science.

742 NATURE PHYSICS | VOL 7 | OCTOBER 2011 | www.nature.com/naturephysics