links for 2010-01-25

  • "My gut feeling is that the model of journalism as a craft will end up more like astronomy, where amateur astronomers are a vital part of the progress of the subject as a whole. Amateur astronomers produce vital data that the professionals use and build upon, as well as creating the odd “exclusive” themselves." [via @moleitau]

    I think the astronomy community is a good model, not only for journalism, but for the way DIYBio can go. Similar balance between working together with main-stream-practitioners and striking out on one's own to gain insights and such.

links for 2010-01-22

Back to the future: Mag+, BERG, and hypercard

image from www.flickr.comIf 2009 was the Year of the Netbook, it's getting to be pretty clear that 2010 is the Year of the Digital Book Reader.

The Kindle and Nook are simple readers with whole bookstores inside them. Indeed, the Kindle has hit on a formula that I think everyone will riff off of (as opposed to exploring other potential biz models).

Now we hear of big magazine publishers exploring layouts that are digital reader friendly. And the amazing BERG worked on a project called Mag+ (video below), showing the future of digital magazines.

It's been really interesting to see the traditional publishing industry drooling at a way out of their downward spiral (being drawn down by their 20th Century biz models). Equally interesting is to see that what was old is new again.

I'm reminded that the early days of the Web was about converting traditional print publications into digital facsimiles. And stretching my memory pre-Web, all this digital book reader talk reminds me of Alan Kay's Dynabook, Jack Scully's Knowledge Navigator, and, my favorite, Hypercard.

So, we're back to creating digital facsimiles of print pubs (albeit better than before). But, when viewing Mag+, I think we could go a wee bit further.

Nah, I don't think we need to turn digital book readers into full-fledged, 'net-connected, hyper-linked information devices (can you say "tablet"?). I'd like to see traditional publishers extend into a third hyper-linked dimension to take advantage of digital formats, rather than just a flat, though pretty, book or magazine. Mag+ does show that, but I am left wanting a tad more.

Yeah, print pubs are mostly flat, but let's not reproduce that flatness in a digital world.

What do you think?

Mag+ from Bonnier on Vimeo.

Image from TheCreativePenn

UPDATE 29jan10: Here we go again. The iPad was announced on 27jan. And Venture Beat writes about a company, inkling, that is taking the textbook into the 21st century. Very exciting.

links for 2010-01-18

links for 2010-01-08

An author ID system is essential to the future of science publishing

image from www.flickr.com Nature recently wrote an article on a proposed Author ID system. I find this momentous.

In my vision of the Future of Science Publishing, which is highly based on the way we currently use the Social Web, one of the key sticking points was the need to authenticate authors. By authenticating authors in a kind of OpenID way, authenticity, reputation, citations, publications, and activity streams could be automatically managed.

What really excited me is that this author ID system, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID), is backed by 23 organizations, including Thomson Reuters, Nature
Publishing Group, Elsevier, ProQuest, Springer, CrossRef, the British
Library and the Wellcome Trust. In short, those most threatened by the dismantling of the science publishing system are taking an active role in reforming it.

Furthermore, these companies recognize that this system not only brings recognition to authors in huge multi-author projects, but "could also be assigned to data sets they helped to generate, comments
on their colleagues' blog posts or unpublished draft papers, edits of
Wikipedia entries and much else besides."

That's brilliant.

They also mention the Digital Object Identifier (DOI), a unique indetifier for papers, books, and "scholarly publication." An ORCID and a DOI (and an immutable time stamp) is all that's need to release science publication from its current story-contained-in-single-paper so that each morsel of info can be labeled with a OCID/DOI/Time stamp and be linkable, comment-able, embed-able, feed-able, and search-able. Just as Tim Berners-Lee intended.

While this is a promising direction, I think the current edifice of science publishing is still going to be around for a while, so outfits like Mendeley will still add a layer of value for some time to come.

So, what do you think of this development? Do you think ORCID will radically change the way we share science information?

links for 2010-01-05