3 ms·

This is such a beautifully and elegantly done analysis. The economics (and particularly in this article, the history) of science is such an untouched gem as a f

This is such a beautifully and elegantly done analysis. The economics (and particularly in this article, the history) of science is such an untouched gem as a fascinating topic. I am so freaking excited to see this post as #1 on HN. One thing folks don't usually mention when talking about science proliferation is that academic and scientific papers served for 100's of years as the only source of science communication. Over time, journals really fit their format as the best way for scientists to communicate - with eachother. However, if you were a layman outside the field, academic papers were not the best way consume science because they were ultimately meant for the colleague in the next city or town over. The implications I'd like to think are pretty big. Now that science can be freed from this old paper format intended for other scientists, here's hoping that the science content shared in the digital age changes as well. The best possible outcome is actual science content for the masses. The worst, photo filters for gel images (I kid).

cinquemb 13y ago
Interesting points you make. The last night, one of my friends who is in college did an analysis in python on a couple subway lines in NYC to tell people whether they should wait for the express or not depending on time of day and etc. He published it online via google sites, but not on github or bitbucket, which surprised me. I think the gap is closing (at least it was posted online), but I can't be certain because institutions still want to maintain control.
czr80 13y ago
Well, scientists still need a means to communicate with each other - I wouldn't want to mix the needs of professional communication with that of popular communication.
saraid216 13y ago
> The best possible outcome is actual science content for the masses. This is actually the job of science reporters: you consume the dense content and explain it in a way that laypeople can understand. Unfortunately, the profession has been undermined by, well, everything that has been undermining journalism.

cinquemb 13y ago

Interesting points you make. The last night, one of my friends who is in college did an analysis in python on a couple subway lines in NYC to tell people whether they should wait for the express or not depending on time of day and etc. He published it online via google sites, but not on github or bitbucket, which surprised me. I think the gap is closing (at least it was posted online), but I can't be certain because institutions still want to maintain control.

czr80 13y ago

Well, scientists still need a means to communicate with each other - I wouldn't want to mix the needs of professional communication with that of popular communication.

saraid216 13y ago

> The best possible outcome is actual science content for the masses. This is actually the job of science reporters: you consume the dense content and explain it in a way that laypeople can understand. Unfortunately, the profession has been undermined by, well, everything that has been undermining journalism.