Just read a paper that included an "I trust companies..." measure in their "AI receptivity" outcome.
-
@mhoye @wordshaper what is hard is definitely social and cultural, but I wouldn't underestimate the lack of access to even knowing about these systems. I have taught almost every not cs former academic I've worked with about the entire existence of eg GitHub. Then we have our own platforms (eg, OSF, https://www.cos.io/products/osf ) that I regularly get criticism from developers for using because "well I don't know what that means/I don't know that place". It's hard to speak to both sides and survive
@mhoye @wordshaper at any rate I'm going to actually try to talk about this at the DevEx research forum at UC Irvine this Friday! I feel these open science moves are really key to an evidence ecosystem that we can rely on, use to drive change, preserve and protect
-
@mhoye @wordshaper at any rate I'm going to actually try to talk about this at the DevEx research forum at UC Irvine this Friday! I feel these open science moves are really key to an evidence ecosystem that we can rely on, use to drive change, preserve and protect
@mhoye @wordshaper and I would like more methodological sharing and clarity even more than data sharing tbh. That I feel is a really culturally overlooked problem even by people building many technical solutions toward reproducibility
-
@grimalkina @mhoye I am then wondering if setting something like this up and layering on some ease-of-use tooling (git is... not the friendliest of things to use) and actual documentation, in conjunction with an org of some sort inclined to push it, would help.
(What, me looking to add *another* post-retirement project to my summer todo list? Nah, not me!
@wordshaper @mhoye all I can say is Ashley teaches programming for biologists AND "how to teach programming" for biology teachers and the needs are vast enough that I constantly worry about how to make sure we're both not working so hard we can't sustain it all!
I've been working next to folks like you two for so many years and *I* am still afraid of fucking it up on a repo or tool in some big public way. It's so hard to do all the work of science AND try to figure out better infrastructure.
-
@mhoye @wordshaper and I would like more methodological sharing and clarity even more than data sharing tbh. That I feel is a really culturally overlooked problem even by people building many technical solutions toward reproducibility
@grimalkina @mhoye It sounds like there are many things that need updating/reworking/someone shouting at, tbh. Which isn't particularly surprising, since that's pretty much describing everything.
I suspect, as a regrettable history of volunteering has taught me, that a lot of these problems can be ameliorated by someone just going "goddamn it, fine, I will Do The Thing." (Doesn't work for everything but is sadly effective for the things people circle 'round and wish were actually working)
-
@wordshaper @mhoye all I can say is Ashley teaches programming for biologists AND "how to teach programming" for biology teachers and the needs are vast enough that I constantly worry about how to make sure we're both not working so hard we can't sustain it all!
I've been working next to folks like you two for so many years and *I* am still afraid of fucking it up on a repo or tool in some big public way. It's so hard to do all the work of science AND try to figure out better infrastructure.
@grimalkina @mhoye 2026, the year I am deeply annoyed I hadn't over-bought disk space and RAM a year ago.
-
@wordshaper @mhoye all I can say is Ashley teaches programming for biologists AND "how to teach programming" for biology teachers and the needs are vast enough that I constantly worry about how to make sure we're both not working so hard we can't sustain it all!
I've been working next to folks like you two for so many years and *I* am still afraid of fucking it up on a repo or tool in some big public way. It's so hard to do all the work of science AND try to figure out better infrastructure.
@grimalkina @mhoye This is a sign the tools and their documentation are substandard. Sucks, because people *shouldn't* be afraid of their tools for anything other than actual-danger reasons. (which are pretty minimal -- this is git and a web front end, not a band saw or acetylene welding rig)
One more multidimensional thing for the personal todo list, I guess.
-
@grimalkina A decade ago now I found journal of geological sciences that accepted paper submissions via github, and the criteria was that the papers - the text, the graphs, all of it - was built from data in the repository in one step. So it was all there, raw data, the calculation methods, the text, you could see how it was all processed... it was the holy grail of published science. And they study rocks! How are these people miles ahead of us using our own tools and they study rocks!?!?
@mhoye @grimalkina I remember similar publications around the same time, in the Cell journal from Elsevier and archaeology journals. Yes, really. They even included 3D visualizations from their excavations.
-
@grimalkina A decade ago now I found journal of geological sciences that accepted paper submissions via github, and the criteria was that the papers - the text, the graphs, all of it - was built from data in the repository in one step. So it was all there, raw data, the calculation methods, the text, you could see how it was all processed... it was the holy grail of published science. And they study rocks! How are these people miles ahead of us using our own tools and they study rocks!?!?
@mhoye @grimalkina As someone who got a masters in Geology as preparation for a career in educational technology, I am curious to know which journal this is. I find many ask for data to be referenced in GitHub but in quck searches could not find a full journal submission option.
Yeah, us who study rocks can do a bit more
-
@mhoye @wordshaper and I would like more methodological sharing and clarity even more than data sharing tbh. That I feel is a really culturally overlooked problem even by people building many technical solutions toward reproducibility
It's the most important work in the world.
I often think about the Antikythera Mechanism, and the fact that we, humans, could make clockwork mechanisms in 150BC that we wouldn't be able to replicate until the 1500s. We still don't know how to make Damascus Steel, not really.
We're so far behind schedule, and only because keeping secrets was more valuable, in the shortest possible term, than sharing knowledge as widely as possible.
-
@grimalkina A decade ago now I found journal of geological sciences that accepted paper submissions via github, and the criteria was that the papers - the text, the graphs, all of it - was built from data in the repository in one step. So it was all there, raw data, the calculation methods, the text, you could see how it was all processed... it was the holy grail of published science. And they study rocks! How are these people miles ahead of us using our own tools and they study rocks!?!?
@mhoye @grimalkina They study rocks and their studies rock. That's how.
SCNR
-
@grimalkina @mhoye Thank you. I have presented this on several occasions, and people responded positively. Yet, when it came to actually discussing and developing this further there was mostly silence. For some reason, researchers still have to take onboard the fact that IT can play a great role in their work, but you need to get involved if you want to develop truly useful “nice” things.
@sandorspruit @grimalkina @mhoye
This sort of thing is my current niche in geophysics. I've automated downloading and preprocessing seismic data; it's been running for, I dunno, 5 years or so. Now people want to collaborate with me just because I have 36TB of ready-to-use data.
But then I'm a software developer who switched to seismology.
-
R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topicR relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
