5 ms·

How To Publish a Scientific Comment in 123 Easy Steps

65 points by smokinn 17y ago

RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago
Depressingly close to my experience, and one of the reasons I left academia, despite significant offers to stay. I long for the day when collaborative media allow multiple authors to converge on an agreed paper. Those that disagree can converge on an alternative paper, and readers can see for themselves the data, reasoning and conclusions. I won't see it - it won't happen in my lifetime.
- bbgm 17y ago
  It just might http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/9/ http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/9/ http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/8/ http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/8/ These are related to sessions at Science Online London held over the last few days. Of course as Cameron notes, there are still significant challenges http://blog.openwetware.org/scienceintheopen/2009/08/23/reflecting-on-a-wave-the-demo-at-science-online-london-2009/ http://blog.openwetware.org/scienceintheopen/2009/08/23/refl...
  - RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago
    The problem isn't really the technology - the problem is the egos and the assignment of credit. It has been said that it's remarkable what can be accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit, but getting the credit is critical to the continuing employment of academics. Solve that with technology and you've got a winner.
    - bbgm 17y ago
      Don't disagree on that point at all. I don't think the credit system is going away. Academics need some incentives to do what they do. If not money, it has to be credit, or some other system. It's frustrating, and one reason I went straight to industry as well.
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      > - the problem is the egos and the assignment of credit. Yep. I'm not in academia, my prior education level precludes me but I dated a lady who was and over the years I have come to simply loathe the infighting and politics that academia has become mired in. I really wonder how many good or maybe even great scientists leave academia because they're sick and tired of the whole spiel to find a job in some company somewhere.
designtofly 17y ago
For those of you who dislike Scribd as much as I do, here's a direct link to author's website and pdf: http://www.physics.gatech.edu/frog/How%20to%20Publish%20a%20Comment%20w%20suggestions.pdf http://www.physics.gatech.edu/frog/How%20to%20Publish%20a%20...
- RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago
  Thank you.
- devin 17y ago
  What's not to like about scribd? It seems to do the job just fine...
  - bradgessler 17y ago
    Read http://blog.bradgessler.com/i-dont-get-scribd http://blog.bradgessler.com/i-dont-get-scribd
  - Maro 17y ago
    Scribd is a step backwards. If they wanted to create value, they could HTMLify PDFs (similar to the Gmail feature or the Google preview page) instead of showing them in a stupid flash window.
    - mingdingo 17y ago
      You just brought up a great idea. Google can do it, but on a limited basis. A startup that could convert pdfs, word documents, and latex files directly to HTML+CSS, with negligible loss of quality, would be MASSIVE. Of course, this requires browsers to standardize, and step 0 is for IE6/IE7 to disappear off the face of the earth. And if IE8 can't keep up with the other browsers, then it should go too. Seriously, what you propose would be super useful.
      - reedlaw 17y ago
        What's wrong with PDF? It's an open standard and displays beautifully on screen or in print. I can resize it to any size and it still renders perfectly (except for embedded bitmaps of course). I'd much rather read a book in PDF format on my screen then have to hope that a website renders properly at a size that is comfortable for reading.
JulianMorrison 17y ago
I truly don't understand why academics put up with journals. If I were in the biz, I'd be organizing a torches-and-pitchforks mob to burn them down and replace them with arXiv, personal websites, and peer review panels who link to good papers.
- bbgm 17y ago
  Because that's not how you get funded. Your funding/tenure, etc are related to where you publish, how often you publish, etc. It's a systemic issue, a system designed for a different era which just does not translate to today's science
  - azanar 17y ago
    The system needs to be redesigned, yet there is very little catalyst for it to be redesigned. People are still more motivated to turn their interests inward, to things like funding, publication lists, tenure, etc. The system is designed to reward those who selfishly work to maintain the status quo. This isn't me passing judgement on these people, just a realization that they are only doing what provides them with the greatest incentives. In a similar situation, I might do the same. But it is also a realization that this isn't just a shallow local minimum. The lifestyle and security of many researcher are tightly coupled to getting funding out of this system, and thus is tightly coupled to following the rules of the system. Either some external force is going to have to shove this system aside, or the members of the community are going to have to collectively accept the pain of a governing body seeing the writing on the wall and attempting to regain control. With the system as entrenched as this, it would have to be a coup of epic proportions to unseat it. The only other option I can see is this system remaining in perpetuity. I noted above that being in a similar position, I'd probably work this system the same way most everyone else does. I might provide the usual excuses as well: family, food, survival, lifestyle, etc. I don't know, because normally it takes a person being put under considerable pressure before they decide what is truly valuable to them, and to what degree they are willing to sacrifice one goal for another. I took a third option while going through my undergraduate years; I decided to not even get involved. I am not saying this as a sanctimonious thumbing-of-my-nose at those who did; these people have my respect for being able to work around the flaws and not be driven mad by them. The allure of being able to work on interesting problems with smart people tempted me toward working to get involved in research, but the glimpses I caught of the politics, mechanisms and incentives chased me away. My significant other at the time was involved in a research effort in computer vision, and the amount of inanity she tolerated, and even in some cases manufactured, killed the desire for me. Since then, I've been told by a number of people I have the mind and personality for research work. Even if that were true, I know I don't have the personality for all the bullshit that comes with it. My philosophy on this is the same that jwz suggests for people thinking of working at a public company: "sometimes the only way to win is not to play."
Robin_Message 17y ago
I'm studying for a PhD at Cambridge, UK, and I'm seriously interested in fixing this. Well, maybe fixing the whole thing is too big, but I'd like to try :-) Anyone know of anything worth getting involved with? Anyone want to work on an alternative to journals?
- bentoner 17y ago
  This might be a good place to start: http://friendfeed.com/science-2-0 http://friendfeed.com/science-2-0 What field are you in?
  - Robin_Message 17y ago
    Computer Science What's particularly galling about computer science publishing, is that our papers are some of the hardest to reproduce. I read too many papers where the idea sounds cool but I have no idea how to reproduce it. What's senseless is, I shouldn't even need to work to reproduce their experiment. We have a perfect, unchanging laboratory (a computer) and the most advanced language for discussing our experiments (programming languages), and we shrink our argument to 15 slices of dead tree.
    - jvdh 17y ago
      Computer Science is one of the places where dead tree publication is going the way of the dodo pretty soon I think. Results can come very fast, and one of the top journals can take 18+ months to review and publish an article. By which time it is almost already obsolete.
      - azanar 17y ago
        Computer Science is one of the places where dead tree publication is going the way of the dodo pretty soon I think. The flag day for this, as alluded to in another thread, will be when fund-raising and faculty appointments stop being closely tied with dead tree publications. There's been ample time for that transition to happen, but not all the interested parties seem so motivated to change things.
Eliezer 17y ago
I begin to think that it would be easier to burn the universities to the ground and start over.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  you aren't back to reading moldbug are you? :p anytime an organization transitions from accomplishing its original goal to a jobs program there's no going back. you have to start over.
Create 17y ago
All data and parameters associated with any open publication should be available to anyone interested in it. This will be fun for all LHC results; nobody can [or is willing for that matter] read, let alone truly(!) interpret LEP data anymore.

65 points by smokinn 17y ago

Depressingly close to my experience, and one of the reasons I left academia, despite significant offers to stay. I long for the day when collaborative media allow multiple authors to converge on an agreed paper. Those that disagree can converge on an alternative paper, and readers can see for themselves the data, reasoning and conclusions. I won't see it - it won't happen in my lifetime.

bbgm 17y ago
It just might http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/9/ http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/9/ http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/8/ http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/8/ These are related to sessions at Science Online London held over the last few days. Of course as Cameron notes, there are still significant challenges http://blog.openwetware.org/scienceintheopen/2009/08/23/reflecting-on-a-wave-the-demo-at-science-online-london-2009/ http://blog.openwetware.org/scienceintheopen/2009/08/23/refl...
- RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago
  The problem isn't really the technology - the problem is the egos and the assignment of credit. It has been said that it's remarkable what can be accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit, but getting the credit is critical to the continuing employment of academics. Solve that with technology and you've got a winner.
  - bbgm 17y ago
    Don't disagree on that point at all. I don't think the credit system is going away. Academics need some incentives to do what they do. If not money, it has to be credit, or some other system. It's frustrating, and one reason I went straight to industry as well.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    > - the problem is the egos and the assignment of credit. Yep. I'm not in academia, my prior education level precludes me but I dated a lady who was and over the years I have come to simply loathe the infighting and politics that academia has become mired in. I really wonder how many good or maybe even great scientists leave academia because they're sick and tired of the whole spiel to find a job in some company somewhere.

designtofly 17y ago

For those of you who dislike Scribd as much as I do, here's a direct link to author's website and pdf: http://www.physics.gatech.edu/frog/How%20to%20Publish%20a%20Comment%20w%20suggestions.pdf http://www.physics.gatech.edu/frog/How%20to%20Publish%20a%20...

RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago
Thank you.
devin 17y ago
What's not to like about scribd? It seems to do the job just fine...
- bradgessler 17y ago
  Read http://blog.bradgessler.com/i-dont-get-scribd http://blog.bradgessler.com/i-dont-get-scribd
- Maro 17y ago
  Scribd is a step backwards. If they wanted to create value, they could HTMLify PDFs (similar to the Gmail feature or the Google preview page) instead of showing them in a stupid flash window.
  - mingdingo 17y ago
    You just brought up a great idea. Google can do it, but on a limited basis. A startup that could convert pdfs, word documents, and latex files directly to HTML+CSS, with negligible loss of quality, would be MASSIVE. Of course, this requires browsers to standardize, and step 0 is for IE6/IE7 to disappear off the face of the earth. And if IE8 can't keep up with the other browsers, then it should go too. Seriously, what you propose would be super useful.
    - reedlaw 17y ago
      What's wrong with PDF? It's an open standard and displays beautifully on screen or in print. I can resize it to any size and it still renders perfectly (except for embedded bitmaps of course). I'd much rather read a book in PDF format on my screen then have to hope that a website renders properly at a size that is comfortable for reading.

JulianMorrison 17y ago

I truly don't understand why academics put up with journals. If I were in the biz, I'd be organizing a torches-and-pitchforks mob to burn them down and replace them with arXiv, personal websites, and peer review panels who link to good papers.

bbgm 17y ago
Because that's not how you get funded. Your funding/tenure, etc are related to where you publish, how often you publish, etc. It's a systemic issue, a system designed for a different era which just does not translate to today's science
- azanar 17y ago
  The system needs to be redesigned, yet there is very little catalyst for it to be redesigned. People are still more motivated to turn their interests inward, to things like funding, publication lists, tenure, etc. The system is designed to reward those who selfishly work to maintain the status quo. This isn't me passing judgement on these people, just a realization that they are only doing what provides them with the greatest incentives. In a similar situation, I might do the same. But it is also a realization that this isn't just a shallow local minimum. The lifestyle and security of many researcher are tightly coupled to getting funding out of this system, and thus is tightly coupled to following the rules of the system. Either some external force is going to have to shove this system aside, or the members of the community are going to have to collectively accept the pain of a governing body seeing the writing on the wall and attempting to regain control. With the system as entrenched as this, it would have to be a coup of epic proportions to unseat it. The only other option I can see is this system remaining in perpetuity. I noted above that being in a similar position, I'd probably work this system the same way most everyone else does. I might provide the usual excuses as well: family, food, survival, lifestyle, etc. I don't know, because normally it takes a person being put under considerable pressure before they decide what is truly valuable to them, and to what degree they are willing to sacrifice one goal for another. I took a third option while going through my undergraduate years; I decided to not even get involved. I am not saying this as a sanctimonious thumbing-of-my-nose at those who did; these people have my respect for being able to work around the flaws and not be driven mad by them. The allure of being able to work on interesting problems with smart people tempted me toward working to get involved in research, but the glimpses I caught of the politics, mechanisms and incentives chased me away. My significant other at the time was involved in a research effort in computer vision, and the amount of inanity she tolerated, and even in some cases manufactured, killed the desire for me. Since then, I've been told by a number of people I have the mind and personality for research work. Even if that were true, I know I don't have the personality for all the bullshit that comes with it. My philosophy on this is the same that jwz suggests for people thinking of working at a public company: "sometimes the only way to win is not to play."

Robin_Message 17y ago

I'm studying for a PhD at Cambridge, UK, and I'm seriously interested in fixing this. Well, maybe fixing the whole thing is too big, but I'd like to try :-) Anyone know of anything worth getting involved with? Anyone want to work on an alternative to journals?

bentoner 17y ago
This might be a good place to start: http://friendfeed.com/science-2-0 http://friendfeed.com/science-2-0 What field are you in?
- Robin_Message 17y ago
  Computer Science What's particularly galling about computer science publishing, is that our papers are some of the hardest to reproduce. I read too many papers where the idea sounds cool but I have no idea how to reproduce it. What's senseless is, I shouldn't even need to work to reproduce their experiment. We have a perfect, unchanging laboratory (a computer) and the most advanced language for discussing our experiments (programming languages), and we shrink our argument to 15 slices of dead tree.
  - jvdh 17y ago
    Computer Science is one of the places where dead tree publication is going the way of the dodo pretty soon I think. Results can come very fast, and one of the top journals can take 18+ months to review and publish an article. By which time it is almost already obsolete.
    - azanar 17y ago
      Computer Science is one of the places where dead tree publication is going the way of the dodo pretty soon I think. The flag day for this, as alluded to in another thread, will be when fund-raising and faculty appointments stop being closely tied with dead tree publications. There's been ample time for that transition to happen, but not all the interested parties seem so motivated to change things.

Eliezer 17y ago

I begin to think that it would be easier to burn the universities to the ground and start over.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
you aren't back to reading moldbug are you? :p anytime an organization transitions from accomplishing its original goal to a jobs program there's no going back. you have to start over.

Create 17y ago

All data and parameters associated with any open publication should be available to anyone interested in it. This will be fun for all LHC results; nobody can [or is willing for that matter] read, let alone truly(!) interpret LEP data anymore.