THREE STORIESTHREE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHSTHREE SCENARIOS

THREE STORIESTHREE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHSTHREE SCENARIOS

THREE STORIESTHREE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHSTHREE SCENARIOS

THREE STORIESTHREE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHSTHREE SCENARIOS

#1: the story of decentralized competition in networks

awesomeif you’re the

hub

great forfairness and

scale

when allowedto evolve…

not allunintended

consequences

are bad ones

small choicesin network design

lead to large changesin outcomes

#2: the story of therighteous fist of BARGH

factual errors on page 1:4.41 impact factor (top 10

psychology)(not for profit)

not to mention social media outcome…

or google search results…

maybe this is whatpost-publication review

actually looks like

#3: the story of eisenomics

don‘t wait for alt-metrics

do it yourself

THREE STORIESTHREE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHSTHREE SCENARIOS

#1: we are all veruca salt now

don‘t care how, I want it now…

wherever I am…

on every device.

expecting scholars to be different

is like believing in magic unicorns

#2: data publicationis not the magic answer

“data mining = the data are mine”“you can’t possibly understand it”“i need to protect my postdocs”

“i might get sued”“someone else might find the key”

“i‘m not paid to make data for others”“it’s not secure”

publish now?

publish now?

publish now?

175,000 data scientists

1,500,000 data managers

more trouble

“normal” peopleare becoming

sensorssensed

processorsparticipants

publish what, and when?who edits?

without an epistemologyof data publishing?

#3: the attacksare going to get far worse

“It would also compel American taxpayers to subsidize the acquisition of important research information by foreign governments and corporations that compete in global markets with the public and private scientific enterprises conductedin the United States.”

on FRPAA:

(american association of publishers)

not compliant with any community definitions

of open access

not compliant with any community definitions

of open access

there will be frontal attacksand there will be subtle

attacks

THREE STORIESTHREE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHSTHREE SCENARIOS

SCENARIO 1

RADICAL INCREMENTALISM

acronym wars!

acronym wars!

FRPAARWA

SOPA PIPA

civil disobedience

routing aroundthe damage

SCENARIO 2

IRRELEVANCE (or A TALE OF TWO SH*TS)

i am going tocure my cancer

in my garage

i am going tocure my cancer

in my garage

#1: bullsh*t!

#2: holy sh*t!

notice: extremeabsence oftraditional

information players

SCENARIO 3

SIMPLE, WEAK, OPEN, TOGETHER

a “SWOT” analysisfor the 21st century

weak = weakness

simple = simplistic

open = unpaid

1. there is no “together”without rights

simple...

2010

simple...

2. there is no “open”without cost

we have it for PLoS One:

$18,900,000

2. there is no “simple”or “weak”

without data

use open datato determine length of protection

a weak embargo compared to a blunt intstrument

full protection

NC protection

true OA - CC BY

simple, weak: article embargo set by economics

but must be based onopen data

alternative: powerful, blunt sweeping mandateshow us the damn data!

3. review =together

revolutions cannot be imagined until they

happen

FIRST THEY IGNORE YOUTHEN THEY LAUGH AT YOUTHEN THEY FIGHT YOUTHEN YOU WIN

FIRST THEY IGNORE YOUTHEN THEY LAUGH AT YOUTHEN THEY FIGHT YOUTHEN YOU WIN

the smartest person in the room

is the room…- david weinberger

DON’T GIVE UP.DON’T EVER GIVE UP.

@wilbankshttp://del-fi.org

thank you.