Peter Suber: The largest obstacles to open access are unfamiliarity and misunderstanding of open access itself

I’ve already complained about the slowness of progress. So I can’t pretend to be patient. Nevertheless, we need patience to avoid mistaking slow progress for lack of progress, and I’m sorry to see some friends and allies make this mistake. We need impatience to accelerate progress, and patience to put slow progress in perspective. The rate of OA growth is fast relative to the obstacles, and slow relative to the opportunities.”

Peter Suber: The largest obstacles to open access are unfamiliarity and misunderstanding of open access itself

I’ve already complained about the slowness of progress. So I can’t pretend to be patient. Nevertheless, we need patience to avoid mistaking slow progress for lack of progress, and I’m sorry to see some friends and allies make this mistake. We need impatience to accelerate progress, and patience to put slow progress in perspective. The rate of OA growth is fast relative to the obstacles, and slow relative to the opportunities.”

Who is Coko? An interview with Coko Co-founder and visionary Adam Hyde : Collaborative Knowledge Foundation

The Scholarly Communications sector can learn a lot from open source and open processes. For example, at Coko we don’t actually own anything. It is the community that owns it. We facilitate the communities success and their success is our success. We share everything we have with them – code, methods, processes, PR, expertise, funding, successes, coffee! – and they in turn share those things with us. We are the community, the community is us. That can only happen in an environment of trust and trust is what openness – the core ingredient to best practice open source – is all about. If more people within the Scholarly Communications sector at large can learn to work like this then they will benefit from it greatly….”

Knowledge Futures Group: An interview with Amy Brand, Director of the MIT Press – The Scholarly Kitchen

The MIT Knowledge Futures Group is a new joint venture of the MIT Press and the MIT Media Lab. Its ultimate goal is to help build a more sustainable scholarly publishing ecosystem. As we grow — adding resources, new staff and now new advisors — we’re looking to accelerate the path from research breakthrough to application and societal benefit, developing tools that enrich and fortify our knowledge infrastructure. At the same time, we’re trying to galvanize a real movement towards greater institutional and public investment in that infrastructure, by serving as a model for it and partnering actively with aligned initiatives. It’s worth pointing out that MIT has a strong track record in homegrown knowledge infrastructure. It is, after all, the birthplace of Dspace and Open Courseware….”

Invest in Open Infrastructure: An Interview with Dan Whaley – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Dan Whaley from the Invest in Open initiative answers questions about what IOI is doing, and sets a broad context for the global effort….

Open infrastructure is the solution to all this.  For me, open infrastructure is simply shorthand for technology in which the incentives to collaborate and work together are built in by design. That includes elements like open source software, open APIs, open data and open standards, but more fundamentally it’s a mindset in which your reward — either personal or organizational — comes from working together as a community for the benefit of all.  

As someone who is product focused, a question I always try to ask is what is the best user experience, regardless of who owns which piece? Does what we’re implementing actually make it easier for people to accomplish their goals? Closed systems often make decisions simply for the sake of preventing or restricting access that create terrible experiences and result in lower utility. Open systems do this too sometimes, but at least the inherent motivations are more likely to be aligned….”

Interview with Alex Shkor of the Decentralised Research Platform DEIP | Eurodoc

Can you imagine a science that is totally open and accessible to the global scientific community and general public: where all research metadata and data is open; where collaboration across disciplines and countries happens instantaneously; where papers are written and reviewed openly and then published without embargoes in Open Access; and where researchers are financially and impactfully rewarded for all of their scientific activities?

Welcome to the new decentralised research platform DEIP! We started out as a team of decentralised systems scientists and professionals, who were working in Information Technology companies, and decided to fundamentally change the way science is funded, conducted, and rewarded so that researchers themselves co-determine the process. DEIP was founded in 2017 and is currently being beta-tested….

DEIP is an online decentralised research platform for and governed by researchers. The platform offers three essential features:

  • Open Access publishing of research papers
  • Open Peer Review of draft research papers
  • Open Funding of research project applications

DEIP enables researchers to work together and assess research projects and papers in an open environment that rewards all of their scientific contributions. The platform is built on blockchain technology and consists of a decentralised network. This means that DEIP is neither owned by the DEIP team or any other centralised body. The platform is designed to be governed directly by the scientific community so that they can define the activities and future of the platform as well as distribute funding….”

Interview with Michael Markie, Director of Publishing at F1000 | Eurodoc

In this interview, Michael Markie, Director of Publishing at F1000, will discuss a new concept for an open publishing platform that aims to facilitate faster, more efficient publishing, as well as making the whole publication process more transparent through Open Data and Open Peer Review….”

Q&A: New Preprint Server for Clinical Research | The Scientist Magazine®

In general, there are a number of reasons. I think first and foremost it is speeding up dissemination of research. If you submit a paper to a journal, it takes on average about seven months before the work is actually published. But that’s an underestimate because normally a lot of times people have to go through various submission and rejection cycles at another journal. So it’s probably more like a year.

It’s not unheard of for people to spend two to three years waiting for the work to come out. And that’s all time where other people in the field could be reading it and building on that work. I think what’s important from a system-wide perspective, if you add up all those years, timesaving could be very important. Steve Quake of the Biohub did a back-of-the-envelope calculation. It could be that after 10 years you could speed up discovery five-fold.

From an individual’s point of view, if you’re a postdoc applying for tenure track, if you post a preprint, you can give to a hiring committee, tenure committee, or grant agency and say, ‘this is my most recent work,’ and show early evidence of productivity, rather than having to tread water for ages. This is particularly important for young scientists.

Finally, it’s an opportunity for authors to get feedback on their work from a very large number of people so that, when it is submitted for formal assessment by a journal, it’s in much better shape. . . . What’s happening there is a lot more people are looking at it than peer reviewers. Normally, you would have three people peer review a paper. If you put it on a preprint server, you could get feedback from, well, 4 million are looking at bioRxiveach month and not all of them are going to read all the papers, but way more than three will be looking at it….”

Meet Mike Eisen | Podcasts | Naked Scientists

In 2019, eLife appointed UC Berkeley geneticist Mike Eisen as the new Editor-in-Chief. His role is to drive the on-going development of eLife and steer the journal through the evolving landscape of science publishing. Ever since his institutional library thwarted his efforts, over 20 years ago, to download papers for his research project, Eisen has been a powerful proponent of the value of the open access movement. Chris Smith went to see him to hear his views on how science publishing needs to change, what he has planned for eLife, and how he almost became a radio sports commentator….”

Much to say about editors! – Editoria

Editoria afficinados will know that the web based word processor that makes our color-coded track changes (and many others) dreams come true is actually a PubSweet component called Wax. And PubSweet pros will know that the component is based on the Substance editor libraries. Still, there are many more layers, both inside Coko technology, and out.

Open source collaborative editors are a very specialized domain. Recently, Coko’s lead PubSweet Developer Jure Triglav wrote a very detailed landscape view of all of the different editor options available in this space.

Also, Coko is working on creating a version of Wax that built against the ProseMirror library, and will be integrated in to Editoria in future. Christos Kokosias is the Lead Wax Developer and specializes in this area. Recently, Coko Co-founder Adam Hyde sat down with Christos to talk about editors. You can listen in!…”