With apologies to Jonathan Swift:
“Great sites have little sites upon their back to bite ’em
And little sites have lesser sites, and so ad infinitum…”
So what happened was, Carole Goble asked on the myExperiment mailing list, “is there a list of scientist social networking sites”? Here is first attempt at such a list (not comprehensive), you’ll have to decide for yourself which are the great, greater, little and lesser sites.
(more…)
I’ve often wondered how all the ridiculous fluffy Web 2.0 marketing hype (see Tim O’Reilly’s principles of Web 2.0) maps into the world of Science. In a talk yesterday, Dave DeRoure argued there is a massive gap between scientists and infrastructure on the Web of Science, most people would agree with this. He points out that there is nothing in the middle to bridge between the two disparate worlds of people and technology. He also claims that Web 2.0 can bridge the gap, and also explains how Web 2.0 “design patterns” maps onto Science. You can see the original slides for yourself, here is my summary. (more…)
UK news-rag The Grauniad has a series of interviews with some of the people behind the next generation web, so-called Web 2.0. After reading these interviews, I can’t help wondering, who are the equivalent pioneers in bioinformatics?
The interviews include…
…and several others too. Most of the interviews are worth reading, I particularly enjoyed Mullenweg’s which contains a wonderful quote:
Q: What is your big idea?
A: I don’t have big ideas. I sometimes have small ideas, which seem to work out.
So who is currently pioneering the “Web of Science”, Bioinformatics 2.0 if you like? Ensemblian Ewan Birney? Ian Holmes at Berkeley? Or somebody else?
[Image credit: Picture from Steve Jurvetson, this post originally published on nodalpoint with comments]
O'Really? 