GrassrootsReview

joined 3 years ago
MODERATOR OF
openscience
sorted by: new top controversial old
1
Introducing the p-hacker app: Train your expert p-hacking skills (www.nicebread.de)
1
Mastodon enables community autonomy, is a social enterprise in and of itself and shifts the site’s scaling focus from sheer number of users to quality engagement and niche communities. (nextcloud.robertwgehl.org)
1
COAR Announces first recommendation for supporting multilingual and non-English content in repositories (www.coar-repositories.org)
1
Dealing With Being Exposed: Setting Boundaries While Being Open (icietla.hypotheses.org)
1
FediScience and other Mastodon communities are growing fast. This is good for #OpenScience, this is our kind of system. So worth reading is: "How to Leave Dying Social Media Platforms". (doctorow.medium.com)
1
Mastodon fits to our requirements for #OpenScience infrastructure. It is a communication standard, like email. So billionaires cannot buy it. (variable-variability.blogspot.com)
 

Sign-ups to FediScience.org, the Mastodon server for publishing scientists, have exploded today. We probably had more sign-ups today than in 2022 before.

Like with email you have to pick a server to sign-up and then you can talk to (almost) everyone. Here is a list of options for people interested in science, academia, GLAM, etc. https://fediscience.org/server-list.html

1
The Open Access journal Nature Communications to publish all review reports in future. (www.nature.com)
1
Scientific Publishing: Peer review without gatekeeping. "eLife will now ... [publish] every paper we review, along with our reviews and an assessment as a Reviewed Preprint" (elifesciences.org)
1
How to build, grow, and sustain reproducibility or open science initiatives: A virtual brainstorming event (www.bihealth.org)
1
Funders and journals increasingly have open data mandates, but adherence is partial. Data "available on request" is often not available and editors asking for data leads to manuscript retractions. (www.nature.com)
1
Overcoming Language Barriers in Academia: Machine Translation Tools and a Vision for a Multilingual Future. (academic.oup.com)
 

Translated versions available in Spanish, French, Magyar, Portuguese and Chinese.

1
Facilitating open science without sacrificing IP rights. A novel tool for improving replicability of published research. (www.embopress.org)
 

Lofi published this on Reddit asking:

I came across this paper - https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202255841 (through r/Open_Access_tracking)

It made me think: Most of the discourse I know about research materials and open science is centered around the idea of public access.

But maybe public access is not vital? What do you think about providing controlled, on-demand access? I mean, public access is preferable, but in practice, public access deters some scientists (due to various reasons, not necessarily IP as the paper assumes), and so we are ending with no access at all. Perhaps providing some access is better than nothing.

What do you think - would society benefit from such on-demand access or should we insist on public access only?

view more: ‹ prev next ›