This link has been bookmarked by 67 people . It was first bookmarked on 22 Apr 2008, by a77ila.
-
26 Aug 11
-
11 Apr 09
Monika KingIs posting raw results online, for all to see, a great tool or a great risk?
-
26 Mar 09
-
12 Feb 09
-
08 Feb 09
Olga KissEz a cikk lett az eredménye az imént becsatolt együttműködésnek.
-
24 Nov 08
-
21 Oct 08
-
05 Oct 08
-
14 Jul 08
lilian ricaudScience 2.0 generally refers to new practices of scientists who post raw experimental results, nascent theories, claims of discovery and draft papers on the Web for others to see and comment on.
-
22 Jun 08
-
his communication is the heart of science, the most powerful tool ever invented for correcting errors, building on colleagues’ work and fashioning new knowledge. Although the classic peer-reviewed paper is important, says Surridge, who publishes a lot of them, “they’re effectively just snapshots of what the authors have done and thought at this moment in time. They are not collaborative beyond that, except for rudimentary mechanisms such as citations and letters to the editor.”
-
In a paper, I can see what you’ve done. But I don’t know how many things you tried that didn’t work. It’s those little details that become clear with an open [online] notebook but are obscured by every other communication mechanism we have. It makes science more efficient.
-
hypercompetitive biomedical fields, where patents, promotion and tenure can hinge on being the first to publish a new discovery.
-
Web 2.0 fits so perfectly with the way science works. It’s not whether the transition will happen but how fast
-
-
06 Jun 08
-
03 Jun 08
-
26 May 08
-
13 May 08
-
12 May 08
-
07 May 08
-
# cience 2.0 generally refers to new practices of scientists who post raw experimental results, nascent theories, claims of discovery and draft papers on the Web for others to see and comment on. # Proponents say these “open access” practices make scientific progress more collaborative and therefore more productive.
-
-
06 May 08
-
05 May 08
George KaoThe print version of the article had all these user comments in the margins of this article (Journalism 2.0)
-
02 May 08
georgiakharpergives pros and cons of open science
open_access dissertation business_models scholarly_communication scholarly_publishing
-
30 Apr 08
-
29 Apr 08
-
David ClayIs posting raw results online, for all to see, a great tool or a great risk?
science_2.0 web2.0 publishing open_data collaboration open_access research open_source
-
28 Apr 08
-
27 Apr 08
-
26 Apr 08
-
25 Apr 08
-
24 Apr 08
-
Ratcatcher"Science 2.0 generally refers to new practices of scientists who post raw experimental results, nascent theories, claims of discovery and draft papers on the Web for others to see and comment on"
-
23 Apr 08
-
22 Apr 08
Suvi KorhonenScience 2.0 generally refers to new practices of scientists who post raw experimental results, nascent theories, claims of discovery and draft papers on the Web for others to see and comment on.
tiede web2.0 openaccess avoimuus scientificamerican tiedeviestintä tiedeviestinta science collaboration opensource internet crowdsourcing 2008 joukkoäly knowledge online open_access publishing semanticweb sharing university academia for:sallal for:pe3 for
-
-
Elise MuellerIs posting raw results online, for all to see, a great tool or a great risk?
-
21 Apr 08
Ruth ParlinThe first generation of World Wide Web capabilities rapidly transformed retailing and information search. More recent attributes such as blogging, tagging and social networking, dubbed Web 2.0, have just as quickly expanded people’s ability not just to
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.