Enthusiasm for Palin, and Echoes of 2008 Divide – New York Times
November 22, 2009
Enthusiasm for Palin, and Echoes of 2008 Divide – New York Times
 MiamiHerald.com |
Enthusiasm for Palin, and Echoes of 2008 Divide
New York Times FORT WAYNE, Ind. — When tickets to see Sarah Palin in Michigan ran out, people drove to her appearance here, three hours away. Barbara Stoutjesdyk posed next to Sarah Palin's bus on Wednesday in Grand Rapids, Mich., where 1000 tickets … Those who follow Sarah Palin are sowing the seeds of their own destruction Will Palin's book tour jump-start a political movement? My Palin prediction: She won't run |
Copenhagen climate summit: 60 heads of state to attend – BBC News
 Chippewa Herald |
Copenhagen climate summit: 60 heads of state to attend
BBC News Hopes for the Copenhagen climate summit in December have been boosted after it emerged that more than 60 presidents and prime ministers plan to attend. There had been concern that no strong agreement would emerge from the talks in Copenhagen. … Britain Begins Poster Campaign Warning of Climate Change Danger As the world gets ready to act on climate change, US hangs back Climate change sceptics and lobbyists put world at risk, says top adviser |
Swimmers, poets among 2010 Rhodes Scholars from US – The Associated Press
 Opelika Auburn News |
Swimmers, poets among 2010 Rhodes Scholars from US
The Associated Press When Henry Spelman found out he'd won a Rhodes Scholarship, his first call was to his girlfriend. To share the good news, of course, but also to see whether she was a winner as well. The couple, both seniors at the University of North Carolina, … Marietta woman named Rhodes Scholar Bellaire man named Rhodes Scholar NY Rhodes Scholar worked on malaria prevention |
Brazil’s President Elbows US on the Diplomatic Stage – New York Times
 China Daily |
Brazil's President Elbows US on the Diplomatic Stage
New York Times BRASÍLIA — Brazil's ambitions to be a more important player on the global diplomatic stage are crashing headlong into the efforts of the United States and other Western powers to rein in Iran's nuclear arms program. … Iran Tests Air Defense System for Protecting Nuclear Plants Iran begins air-defense drills to protect nuclear sites Iran Drills Simulate Defense of Nuclear Sites |
Article-Level Metrics At PLoS > Addition Of Usage Data
September 16, 2009
As part of our ongoing article-level metrics program, we’re delighted to announce that all seven PLoS journals will now provide online usage data for published articles. With this addition, the suite of metrics on PLoS articles now includes measures of: online usage; citations from the scholarly literature; social bookmarks; blog coverage; and the Comments, Notes and ‘Star’ ratings that have been made on the article.
As discussed recently, we at PLoS feel that there is much to be gained from assessing research articles on their own merits rather than on the basis of the journal (and its impact factor) where the work happens to be published. [snip]
PLoS has therefore embarked on a program to aggregate a range of available data about an article and place that data on the article itself. The data are found on the new tab called ‘Metrics’, available on all articles. A reader can now scan the various metrics to determine the extent to which the article has been viewed, cited, covered in the media and so forth. With the addition of usage data to the article-level metrics we have taken another step towards providing the community with valuable data that can be used and analyzed.
In order to make article-level metrics as open and useful as possible, we are providing our entire dataset as a downloadable spreadsheet and we encourage interested researchers to download the data and perform their own analyses.
Related
[http://scholarship20.blogspot.com/2009/06/article-level-metrics-at-plos-and.html]
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/VCXZSkDThIA/article-level-metrics-at-plos-addition.html
Berkman Center Lecture / Webcast > Transforming Scholarly Communication | September 18 2009 |
September 13, 2009
Lee Dirks / Director, Education & Scholarly Communication / Microsoft External Research
Friday/ September 18, 1:15pm / Pound Hall Room 100 (Map) / Free and Open to the Public /
In Person > RSVP Requested / Webcast > Live at 1:15 pm ET.
This event is co-sponsored by the Harvard Business School Knowledge and Library Services, Harvard Law School Library, and the Office for Scholarly Communication.
In the future, frontier research in many fields will increasingly require the collaboration of globally distributed groups of researchers needing access to distributed computing, data resources and support for remote access to expensive, multi-national specialized facilities such as telescopes and accelerators or specialist data archives.
There is also a general belief that an important road to innovation will be provided by multi-disciplinary and collaborative research – from bio-informatics and earth systems science to social science and archeology. There will also be an explosion in the amount of research data collected in the next decade – petabytes will be common in many fields. These future research requirements constitute the ‘eResearch‘ agenda.
Powerful software services will be widely deployed on top of the academic research networks to form the necessary ‘Cyberinfrastructure‘ to provide a collaborative research environment for the global academic community.
The difficulties in combining data and information from distributed sources, the multi-disciplinary nature of research and collaboration, and the need to move to present researchers with tooling that enable them to express what they want to do rather than how to do it highlight the need for an ecosystem of Semantic Computing technologies.
Such technologies will further facilitate information sharing and discovery, will enable reasoning over information, and will allow us to start thinking about knowledge and how it can be handled by computers.This talk will review the elements of this vision and explain the need for semantic-oriented computing by exploring eResearch projects that have successfully applied relevant technologies — and anticipated impact on scholarly communication as we know it today.
It will also suggest that a software + service model with scientific services delivered from the cloud will become an increasingly accepted model for research.
About Lee
Lee Dirks is the Director of Education & Scholarly Communications in Microsoft’s External Research division, where he manages a variety of research programs related to open access to research data, interoperability of archives and repositories, preservation of digital information as well as the application of new technologies to facilitate teaching and learning in higher education.An 20-year veteran across multiple information management fields,
Lee holds an M.L.S. degree from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill as well as a post-masters degree in Preservation Administration from Columbia University. In addition to past positions at Columbia and with OCLC (Preservation Resources),
Lee has held a variety of roles at Microsoft since joining the company in 1996 – namely as the corporate archivist, then corporate librarian, and as a senior manager in the corporate market research organization.In addition to participation on several (US) National Science Foundation task forces, Lee also teaches as adjunct faculty at the iSchool at the University of Washington, and serves on the advisory boards for the University of Washington Libraries as well as the iSchool’s Master of Science in Information Science program.
During his career, his team’s work on the library intranet site at Microsoft was recognized as a “Center of Excellence Award for Technology” in 2003 by the Special Library Association‘s (SLA) Business & Finance Division. Additionally, Lee was presented with the 2006 Microsoft Marketing Excellence Award by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer – for a marketing & engineering partnership around a breakthrough market opportunity analysis process which is now a standard operating procedure across Microsoft.
Source
[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/2009/09/dirks]
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/_JhrCpvkrVg/transforming-scholarly-communication.html
PostRank™ > Online Content Ranking
September 6, 2009
PostRank™ is a scoring system developed by AideRSS to rank any kind of online content, such as RSS feed items, blog posts, articles, or news stories. PostRank is based on social engagement, which refers to how interesting or relevant people have found an item or category to be.
>>> Best Viewed In Firefox <<<
Examples of engagement include writing a blog post in response to someone else, bookmarking an article, leaving a comment on a blog, or clicking a link to read a news item.
PostRank measures engagement by analyzing the types and frequency of an audience’s interaction with online content. An item’s PostRank score represents how interesting and relevant people have found it to be. The more interesting or relevant an item is, the more work they will do to share or respond to that item so interactions that require more effort are weighted higher.
PostRank scoring is based on analysis of the “5 Cs” of engagement: creating, critiquing, chatting, collecting, and clicking. By collecting interaction engagement_metrics in these categories the overall engagement score is calculated and the PostRank value is determined.
The 5 Cs of Engagement
- Creating
The strongest form of engagement is demonstrated by using an item as inspiration to create your own, for example, writing your own blog post that responds to or refutes someone else’s blog post. Creation requires the most thought and investment of time, actively generates conversation, and therefore indicates the highest level of engagement. - Critiquing
Reading a blog post and then leaving a comment requires an investment of time, thought and effort (or sometimes just typing and name-calling…), and is a form of conversation. However, it requires less effort than writing a whole blog post. So while it is an important action, it does not indicate as much engagement as Creating. - Chatting
Sharing and discussing information can often be started with one click, so it doesn’t require a major investment of effort. However, a desire to share is a strong indication of relevance, and the act of sharing and its ensuing discussion are acts of conversation. Use of social media applications like Twitter encourage both the sharing of information and the resulting conversations. As a result, social media “chatting” indicates a good level of engagement. - Collecting
Bookmarking or submitting items to social sites also tend to be “one-click” actions. They are intentional acts of archiving and sharing, but don’t require much time or effort. However, the sharing that occurs often sparks conversations, so Collecting does demonstrate some engagement. - Clicking
Activities like clicks and page views indicate lower engagement because they’re passive interactions. Clicking a link to read a blog post doesn’t require much work, and you’re not giving anything back except your reading time. It is an intentional act, however, and thus indicates a mild level of interest and engagement. Which may grow after the item is read.
[snip]
Engagement Sources We Track
Engagement sources evolve as new and interesting ways of interacting with with online content evolves. Here are several examples of engagement data sources that are included in PostRank:
- Views – Real-time > Pageviews within RSS readers and via PostRank widgets
- Clicks – Real-time > Clicks within RSS readers and via PostRank widgets
- Comments – Periodic updates > The number of comments on the item
- Google Trackbacks – Periodic updates > The number of links to the item from other websites
- FriendFeed – Real-time >The number of comments and likes on the item
- Digg – Real-time > The number of diggs, and comments on the item
- Reddit – Real-time > The number of comments and votes (up and down) on the item
- Tumblr - Real-time > The number of Tumblr mentions
- del.icio.us – Real-time > The number of bookmarks saved
- Ma.gnolia – Real-time > The number of bookmarks saved
- Diigo – Real-time > The number of bookmarks saved
- Furl - Real-time > The number of bookmarks saved
- Twitter – Real-time > The number of Twitter mentions
- Jaiku – Real-time > The number of Jaiku mentions
- Identi.ca – Real-time > The number of Identi.ca mentions
- Brightkite – Real-time > The number of Brightkite mentions
- Twit Army – Real-timec > The number of Twit Army mentions
- Blip - Real-time > The number of Blip mentions
- Feecle - Real-time > The number of Feecle mentions
- MexicoDiario – Real-time > The number of MexicoDiario mentions
Source
[http://www.postrank.com/postrank#what]
FAQ
[http://blog.postrank.com/faq/]
Getting Started
[http://blog.postrank.com/getting-started/]
Press & Web 2.0 Media Coverage
[http://blog.postrank.com/media/]
Subscriptions
[http://www.postrank.com/subscriptions]
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/zx8eFQyiCQw/postrank.html
Podcast > Open Access And The Future Of Scholarly Communication
September 5, 2009
Open Access and the Future of Scholarly Communication: Dissemination, Prestige, and Impact
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/Yfii1gRZnMk/open-access-and-future-of-scholarly.html
New Journal Models And Publishing Perspectives In The Evolving Digital Environment
September 5, 2009
Cassella, Maria and Calvi , Licia New journal models and publishing perspectives in the evolving digital environment., 2009 . In IFLA 2009 : Libraries create futures : building on cultural heritage, Milano (Italy), 24-27 August 2009. (Unpublished) [Presentation]
Abstract(s)
Open access combined with Web 2.0 networking tools is fast changing the traditional journals’ functions and framework and the publishers’ role. As content is more and more available online in digital repositories and on the web an integrated, interconnected, multidisciplinary information environment is evolving and Oldenburg’s model disintegrates: the journal is no more the main referring unit of the scholarly output, as it used to be mainly for STM disciplines, but scholars attention is deeply concentrated on article level.
New journal models are thus evolving. In the first part of this presentation authors discuss these new experimental journal models, i.e. – overlay journals – interjournals – different levels journals In the second part of the presentation authors drive readers’ attention on the role commercial publishers could play in this digital seamless writing arena. According to the authors, publishers should concentrate much more on value-added services both for authors, readers and libraries, such as navigational services, discovery services, archiving and ex-post evaluation services.
La crescita della letteratura scientifica ad accesso aperto e i nuovi strumenti del Web 2.0 stanno rapidamente cambiando le tradizionali funzioni del periodico scientifico. Il modello di Henry Oldenburg si disintegra e la rivista scientifica cessa di essere il principale output intellettuale della ricerca, dal momento che l’attenzione degli studiosi è ormai tutta concentrata a livello dell’articolo (dalla ricerca fino alle nuove metriche di valutazione).
Le riviste tradizionali conservano un valore che è legato in modo prevalente ormai all’avanzamento nella carriera accademica più che all’aggiornamento scientifico. Nuovi modelli di riviste stanno emergendo in questo contesto: gli “overlay journals”, gli “interjournals” e i “different levels journals”. Dal momento che il contenuto non è più il valore aggiunto di una pubblicazione, quale ruolo spetta agli editori scientifici oggi? Gli autori sostengono che il futuro dell’editoria scientifica è legato al contesto digitale ovvero all’offerta di servizi a valore aggiunto differenziati per autori, lettori e biblioteche.
Source and Full Text Available At
[http://eprints.rclis.org/16741/]
!!! Thanks To Garrret Eastmam, Librarian, The Rowland Institute At Harvard For The HeadsUp !!!
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/fKrs8n65Weg/new-journal-models-and-publishing.html
Podcast >Open Access And The Future Of Scholarly Communication
September 5, 2009
Open Access and the Future of Scholarly Communication: Dissemination, Prestige, and Impact
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/Yfii1gRZnMk/open-access-and-future-of-scholarly.html
Citation Distortions > Unfounded Authority
September 3, 2009
How Citation Distortions Create Unfounded Authority: Analysis Of A Citation Network / Steven A Greenberg / Associate Professor Of Neurology
BMJ 2009;339:b2680 / Published 21 July 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b2680
To understand belief in a specific scientific claim by studying the pattern of citations among papers stating it.
Design
A complete citation network was constructed from all PubMed indexed English literature papers addressing the belief that β amyloid, a protein accumulated in the brain in Alzheimer’s disease, is produced by and injures skeletal muscle of patients with inclusion body myositis. Social network theory and graph theory were used to analyse this network.
Main outcome measures
Citation bias, amplification, and invention, and their effects on determining authority.
Results
The network contained 242 papers and 675 citations addressing the belief, with 220 553 citation paths supporting it. Unfounded authority was established by citation bias against papers that refuted or weakened the belief; amplification, the marked expansion of the belief system by papers presenting no data addressing it; and forms of invention such as the conversion of hypothesis into fact through citation alone. Extension of this network into text within grants funded by the National Institutes of Health and obtained through the Freedom of Information Act showed the same phenomena present and sometimes used to justify requests for funding.
Conclusion
Citation is both an impartial scholarly method and a powerful form of social communication. Through distortions in its social use that include bias, amplification, and invention, citation can be used to generate information cascades resulting in unfounded authority of claims. Construction and analysis of a claim specific citation network may clarify the nature of a published belief system and expose distorted methods of social citation.
PDF [http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/339/jul20_3/b2680]
News Coverage
Diversion, Invention, and Socialized Medicine
[http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/07/30/diversion-invention-and-socialized-medicine/]
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/Kug9RHZiANc/unfounded-authority.html
The Scientific Paper in the Age of Twitter
September 3, 2009
The FASEB Journal / 2009 / 23 / 7 / 2015-2018
Maureen Dowd: If you were out with a girl and she started twittering about it in the middle, would that be a deal-breaker or a turn-on?
Biz Stone: (dryly) In the middle of what?
Maureen Dowd: Why did you think the answer to e-mail was a new kind of e-mail?
Biz Stone: With Twitter, it’s as easy to unfollow as it is to follow.
—The New York Times, 2009 (1)
For centuries a small number of writers were confronted by many thousands of readers. This changed toward the end of the last century. It began with the daily press opening to its readers space for ‘letters
to the editor.’ And today… at any moment the reader is ready to turn into a writer.
—Walter Benjamin, 1931 (2)
All registered users are able to add Notes, Comments, and Ratings to any article…Highlight the text to be annotated, and then click the ‘Add a note to the text’ link in the right-hand navigation menu of the article …Notes can be started at any point within the text, but for ease of reading we ask that you do not begin Notes in the middle of words.
—Public Library of Science, 2009 (3)
THE SANDBOX OF IDEAS
It’s reassuring to read that our colleagues at The Public Library of Science have remained true to the integrity of the word, if not the sentence or thought. PLoS One has raised this banner for verbal integrity in a cheery commercial entitled “PLoS Journals Sandbox: A Place to Learn and Play (3) .” The new format, which permits instant interruption of on-line, formal scientific papers, is certainly in keeping with the temper of our time. Were this to have been the practice in old-fashioned print libraries, many of our journals would by now resemble kitty litter.
In the Age of Twitter we’ve become accustomed to bell-tones and roving thumbs in every venue of human life. We call it social networking when we summon up Facebook, YouTube, or MySpace—and it’s no longer limited to teenagers. Twitter and the other social networks have been used by nearly one in five of online adults ages 25 to 34 (4) . Nowadays, in the plenary sessions of national scientific meetings, one sees heads bowed in homage to the Holy Book of Face or tweeting to Twitter in fewer than 140 characters of text.
Biz Stone, the founder of Twitter, explains:
Twitter is a service for friends, family, and co–workers to communicate and stay connected through the exchange of quick, frequent answers to one simple question: What are you doing? (5)
[snip]
And as for science: what are we doing? Today, on screens large and small, every online scientific paper is just a cursor stroke away. That makes it possible, as Benjamin predicted, for any reader to turn into a writer. No surprise, then, that PLoS and other new venture journals encourage us to adorn the digital text with notes and comments, blogs and tweets. [snip] Right on to the Public Library of Science! How fitting it is that PLoS, the youngest kid on the block of reputable science journals, is out to compete in the sandbox of ideas (3) .
ENDANGERED SPECIES OF PRINT
It’s no secret that scientific journals have been losing readers of their printed versions to the greater audience on the web. For many scientific journals, the number of “hits” they receive daily online is a factor or two greater than their monthly print circulation. [snip]The printed word still retains a good chunk of older devotees, but even these are as likely as their younger colleagues to prefer electronic to printed copies of their favorite journals (8) . [snip]
This sea change in the way that information is handled and supported has worried many and frightened a few (9) . We might recall that scientific journals as we know them are relatively recent arrivals on the scene and have moved along paths trod by the general culture. [snip]. Science and publishing became professionalized at the dawn of the Enlightenment. The two oldest scientific journals on record are The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (London) and the Journal de Scavants (Paris), both founded in 1665. Originally filled with material of general interest for fellow citizens of “the republic of letters,” they soon morphed into publications that reported the most rigorous science of the day (10) . [snip]
IT HAS NOT ESCAPED OUR NOTICE
The mold was struck for the modern scientific paper between the two world wars. [snip] .Today the acronymic IMRaD formula (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) is now required by all reputable journals, including this one. But there’s always been wiggle-room around the canonical IMRaD format; most journals are enlivened by letters to the editor, rebuttals, conference proceedings, abstracts of meetings, news reports, etc. Walter Benjamin’s description in 1931 of the marketplace of print still applies to the market in scientific ideas: Today there is hardly a gainfully employed European who could not, in principle, find an opportunity to publish somewhere or other comments on his work, grievances, documentary reports, or that sort of thing. Thus, the distinction between author and public is about to lose its basic character (13).
He would have loved texting and Twitter; I can imagine his pleasure at running his thumbs over the passing comments and pertinent grievances as he “follows” and “unfollows” as both author and reader
In this context, one can only imagine what the epochal Watson-Crick paper would look like these days on PLoS. Their 1953 paper was written as a “Letter to the Editor” in Nature and never underwent peer review. John Maddox, editor-in-chief at the time, later admitted that “the Crick and Watson paper could not have been refereed: its correctness is self-evident.” That’s a matter of dispute, as we’ll see (14) . The Watson-Crick paper begins with:
We wish to suggest a structure for the salt of deoxyribose nucleic acid (D.N.A.). This structure has novel features which are of considerable biological interest…
The ending of the paper is of course perhaps the best known in scientific prose:
It has not escaped our notice that the specific pairing we have postulated immediately suggests a possible copying mechanism for the genetic material.
But for many of us, the real action is in the acknowledgments at the end:
We are much indebted to Dr. Jerry Donohue for constant advice and criticism, especially on interatomic distances. We have also been stimulated by a knowledge of the general nature of the unpublished experimental results and ideas of Dr. M. H. F. Wilkins, Dr. R. E. Franklin and their co-workers at King’s College, London (15).
One need only to imagine what tweets, twoops, formal corrections, and comments might decorate these passages on PLoSOne today. Pauling, Chargaff, Avery, Meselson, Cairns, Donohue, Perutz, Franklin, and Wilkins would have had their say:
This structure has novel features COMMENT: YEAH! HYDROGEN BONDING, LINUS!) which are of considerable biological interest. COMMENT: FOR WHICH I WROTE THE CHEMISTRY, ERWIN FORMAL CORRECTION: IT’S THE GENETIC MATERIAL, YOU FOOLS!, GENES! OSWALD
It has not escaped our notice that the specific pairing FORMAL CORRECTION: BASE PAIRING A/T=G/C, ERWIN we have postulated immediately suggests a possible copying mechanism for the genetic material. COMMENT: LIKE WHAT? CONSERVED? SEMI? MATT COMMENT: MORTAL OR IMMORTAL? CAIRNS
We are much indebted to Dr. Jerry Donohue for constant advice and criticism, especially on interatomic distances. FORMAL CORRECTION: SEZ YOU! I TOLD YOU ABOUT THE KETO TO ENOL TAUTOMERS. YOU KNEW SQUAT FROM THE CHEMISTRY! JERRY We have also been stimulated by a knowledge of the general nature FORMAL CORRECTION: I SHOWED YOU THEIR PICTURES, MAX of the unpublished experimental results and ideas of Dr. M. H. F. Wilkins, Dr. R. E. Franklin FORMAL CORRECTION: YOU PEEKED, “DARK LADY” and their co-workers at King’s College, London COMMENT: OUR TWO FOLLOWING PAPERS ARE DATA, YOURS IS A LEAP, MAURY.
ARCADES TO THE BORDER
Walter Benjamin, (1895–1940) the quintessential European intellect and literary omnivore, would have loved having a COMMENTS and FORMAL CORRECTIONS option at his finger-tips. [snip]
More to the point: much of the Arcades Project prefigures the home page of a social network on the Web. Benjamin literally explores a network: the linked indoor shopping arcades of nineteenth century Paris, the Passages (16) . I imagine a Benjamin today, reincarnated as the perennial flaneur; who follows a path in the Arcade of Panoramas. He stops occasionally at one site or another site. The flaneur ambles (surfs) along a protected space (MySpace) in which bustling crowds are reflected in shiny Windows. He adjusts his cravat in a store-front mirror (Facebook), and when the bell-tone rings in his pocket, he takes out his timepiece (Blackberry). He looks past his mirror image (YouTube), to find two generations of followers (Twitter).
Were Benjamin to log on to Twitter, he’d have thousands of tweets on hand to send to generations of followers. [snip]In the century of the common man film was art without “aura” and accessible to all:
Magician and surgeon compare to painter and cameraman. The painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, the cameraman penetrates deeply into its web…Thus, for contemporary man the representation of reality by the film is incomparably more significant than that of the painter, since it offers, precisely because of the thoroughgoing permeation of reality with mechanical equipment, an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment (2) .
I can see Benjamin now tweeting, now twoopsing, now blogging, now surfing, now scrolling. His thumbs move quickly over the tiny keys—the sandbox of images in sight. He tweets directly to Biz Jones and the other followers of WB (his nom-de-tweet), an upbeat quote from Paul Valery (1928). Valery and WB were sure that other great gadgets would soon supplant celluloid film:
Just as water, gas, and electricity are brought into our houses from far off to satisfy our needs in response to a minimal effort, so we shall be supplied with visual or auditory images, which will appear and disappear at a simple movement of the hand, hardly more than a sign (17) .
Pretty good prediction, no? Isn’t that “simple movement of the hand” what the thumbs are doing these days on a Blackberry. The quote is also about twice the 140 characters that Biz Stone permits, but heck, WB could have split it in two.
[snip]
It’s less than 140 characters. I’d bet that Benjamin would have been at home in our new world of texting and tweets, blogs and hand-helds. In the Age of Twitter, he’d be ready to play in the sandbox of ideas, and we wait for his FASEB Journal essay in “Milestones.”
Source and Full Text (Open Access?)
Full Text Available
HTML [http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/content/full/23/7/2015]
PDF [http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/reprint/23/7/2015]
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/oJwSkRENu08/scientific-paper-in-age-of-twitter.html
From Publishing to Knowledge Networks: Reinventing Online Knowledge Infrastructures
September 3, 2009
Alexander Hars / Berlin: Springer/ 2003 / ISBN 3-540-01250-8 / $US 104
1.1. Motivation 1
1.2. Analytical focus 5
1.3. Objectives 7
1.4. Approach 7
2. Characteristics of scientific knowledge infrastructures 9
2.1. Theoretical analysis 10
2.2. Empirical analysis: Emerging knowledge infrastructures 34
2.3. Visions of scientific knowledge infrastructures 55
2.4. Synthesis 57
3. Structure of scientific knowledge 83
3.1. Objectives 83
3.2. Theoretical foundations 87
3.3. Object-oriented model of scientific knowledge 102
3.4. Elements of scientific knowledge 124
4. Implications 187
4.1. Feasibility: IS Cybrarium 187
4.2. Conclusion 196
Source and Detailed Table Of Contents
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Scholarship20/~3/Md1RfCaKstA/from-publishing-to-knowledge-networks.html
