May 17, 2015
2. research needs to be communicatedto be powerful. 3. 1. the unexpected power of thelaw to defeat unexpected usesof technology. 4. Licensed under CC BY SA by Ed Uthman, http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] 5. Textunexpected development:hypertext and browsers. 6. unexpected development:content industry disruption. 7. nothing in the architecture to prevent people from building 8. something in the architecture to prevent people from sharing 9. no:copying,distribution,display, etc.(unless licensed) 10. not: 11. built for this(so whats this?) 12. (or this?) 13. the scholarly content industry reaction. 14. (we are subsidizing the dig, sadly) 15. @ $20 per article $10, 940(why I do what I do) 16. the unexpected power of the law toenable unexpected uses of technology. 17. 2. the network fragments content that used to be integrated by its medium. 18. we need rights (legal or normative) to createnetworks with knowledge. 19. assembly 20. research 21. credit 22. attribution (does not) = citation 23. annotation 24. not always connectable to the law. 25. publication is step 1. 26. changes in access 27. changes in metrics 28. changes in peer review style 29. changes in publishable objects 30. changes in collaboration 31. changes in hardware 32. changes in participation 33. 3.first principles. 34. when we try to solve all theproblems at once, we overdo it. 35. Taking the "forklift upgrade" approach tonetworking, it specified eliminating all existingprotocols and replacing them with new ones atall layers of the stack. This madeimplementation difficult, and was resisted bymany vendors and users with significantinvestments in other network technologies. Inaddition, the protocols included so manyoptional features that many vendorsimplementations were not interoperable.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Systems_Interconnection 36. let the critics fix the problems. 37. avoid unintendedconsequences of control. 38. practice separation ofconcerns 39. Edsger Wybe Dijkstra 40. We know that a program must be correct and we can study it from that viewpoint only; we also know that it should be efficient and we can study its efficiency on another day, so to speak. In another mood we may ask ourselves whether, and if so: why, the program is desirable. But nothing is gained --on the contrary!-- bytackling these various aspects simultaneously. It is what I sometimes have called "the separation of concerns",which, even if not perfectly possible, is yet the only available technique for effective ordering of onesthoughts, that I know of. This is what I mean by "focusing ones attention upon some aspect": it doesnot mean ignoring the other aspects, it is just doingjustice to the fact that from this aspects point of view,the other is irrelevant. It is being one- and multiple-track minded simultaneously. 41. treat content, data, software, and privacy inseparate bins, but with aneye towards forming astack. 42. Creative Commons works at year end500,000,000100.0%450,000,00090.0%400,000,00080.0%350,000,00070.0%300,000,00060.0%TotalFree %250,000,00050.0%Ported %200,000,00040.0%150,000,00030.0%100,000,00020.0% 50,000,00010.0% 0 0.0%2003 2004 20052006 20072008 20092010 2011-09 43. aggregation. tagging. non-linearity.flow. reuse. adaptation.Wikimedia globe is & All rights reserved, Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 44. open core / variety of apps 45. sage bionetworkspublic genomic records requires informed consent to share.static dynamic observational genomicgenomicdata data data 46. taxpayers waking up 47. nothing beats a funder mandate. % of author compliance with NIH deposit80706050403020100 before mandateafter mandate 48. in a world of abundance, qualityis economically valuable. 49. simple. weak. standardized. open. 50. simple. weak. standardized. open. 51. simple. weak. standardized. open. 52. simple. weak. standardized. open. 53. p.s.we have no idea how weird its going to get. 54. how does your library react in the world that is racing right at us? 55. in a world of constant change, opensystems can out-evolve closed ones. 56. thank you.