4 ms·
Maybe not secret then, but to be released at a later date. Or released in one of those journals that most of cannot access.
by bestes 15y ago
Maybe not secret then, but to be released at a later date. Or released in one of those journals that most of cannot access.
- lutorm 15y agoNo one releases data in journals, at least not in astronomy. There are dedicated sites for this, e.g. http://archive.stsci.edu/ http://archive.stsci.edu/ About the later date: I think it's reasonable that those that put together the proposal and thought up the project have a chance at getting their results out first. Otherwise, why would you go through the effort of planning and executing observations if you could just poach someone else's data as it comes down the pipe? Think of it as a 1-year patent on the research project.
- tingletech 15y agoThe data cite people http://datacite.org/ http://datacite.org/ are trying to figure out how to create "data papers" and "data journals" that would let publishing data get a "peer-review" status that would help people advance towards tenure.
- lutorm 15y agoYeah, this would probably be an important incentive.
- arcdrag 15y agoThere's often cases of the data literally being measured in tera or peta bytes. Releasing the raw data isn't always feasible.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- noilly 15y agoI also assumed that the storage/bandwidth/computational costs of particle accelerator data sets would make open access practically useless
- aperiodic 15y agoThe mother of one of my friends works with the Zooniverse[1] project, a citizen science effort. She was saying that one of their biggest problems is how to distribute their data to the public. I naïvely suggested BitTorrent, figuring the sets were in the 10s of gigabytes at most. She laughed and said that that wasn't a great way to distribute terabytes of data every few weeks. [1]: http://www.zooniverse.org/ http://www.zooniverse.org/
- nl 15y agoMost journals can be accessed by those working professionally in the field. Some argue this isn't good enough (and I have some sympathy for those arguments). But it's very different to a deliberate action to hide or obscure information.
- grammaton 15y agoI can see why people might not like this, but personally I would tend to think this is actually a good thing. Just imagine if climate deniers or intelligent design proponents had open access to every scientific paper they might want - imagine the howling din of useless distraction that would result. More generally, and less politically charged, I think it cuts down on the amount of aimless speculating and ill informed inquiry that an actual expert has to deal with. That said, it's very true that this is worlds different from maliciously withholding data.
- archgoon 15y ago>Or released in one of those journals that most of cannot access Go down to your local university library. Go over to one of the computers (or hop on the wifi). Read the article. Email it to yourself. Not that hard now was it? This is not ideal, but it's not that you _cannot_ access it, it's just not convenient.
- batpad 15y agouh.. and what if you're in India? uhh .. apply for a Visa at your local consulate, hop onto a plane, go down to the library ... not very convenient, innit? I'm sorry, but academic data walled up in closed journals (im sorry you live in a coccoon where you think everyone has a local university library) is malicious withholding of information - i dont imply that malice exists on the part of the scientist publication, but of the larger system - smug statements that data available only to experts will save the 'wise ones' from useless questions and let them do work or so, are, i think, retarded. any-how, just my personal opinion.
- archgoon 15y agoInterlibrary Loan. There are places in the world that don't have internet either you know.