Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Density is nice, but what about longevity? (Score 1) 185

If you're so disinterested in doing your own research on this, and believe SSDs still have this problem, no amount of explanation is going to convince you otherwise. I'm going to put you into the same basket as people who argue that Linux is not ready for regular users, and just ignore you. There's no point in arguing with someone who has such a rigid mindset. It's like trying to break concrete with a spoon.

Comment What about IPA/IVA? (Score 1) 31

But if everyone populated and used curated public databases, then there would be no need for the army of PhD and Masters students employed by IPA/IVA to read papers and feed their proprietary knowledge base. What would people do with all the money that's currently spent on propping up the Qiagen army?

Comment Re:Easy to explain (Score 4, Interesting) 418

why is key academic software not open source?

Because people do the minimum required to get publications (and/or money), and cleaning up source code (so it can be exposed to the world) is a lot of work. This is especially the case if the code depends on other libraries with various different software licenses.

One of the ways to help fix this problem is to place restrictions on publication, so that open source licences are required for software. F1000 Research has just changed their policy to do this:

http://blog.f1000research.com/...

We recently strengthened our stance on software availability to better align with our Open Science principles. Now, the source code underlying any newly presented software must be made publicly available and assigned an open license. We strongly encourage the use of an OSS approved licence, but will accept other open licenses including Creative Commons. Software papers describing non-open software, code and/or web tools will be rejected.

The current situation demonstrates that forcing these licenses is required in order to get people to use them. BMC Evolutionary Biology already had a recommendation for open source licenses in its policy:

BMC Evolutionary Biology recommends , but does not require, that the source code of the software should be made available under a suitable open-source license that will entitle other researchers to further develop and extend the software if they wish to do so. Typically, an archive of the source code of the current version of the software should be included with the submitted manuscript as a supplementary file. Since it is likely that the software will continue to be developed following publication, the manuscript should also include a link to the home page for the software project. For open source projects, we recommend that authors host their project with a recognized open-source repository such as bioinformatics.org or sourceforge.net

Comment Re:The next question (Score 1) 120

That's about a kiloton of coal every four months to just replace the current carbon that's being lost. To actually make a dent in the planet's carbon supply, it would be necessary to add more than that. Good luck finding the fuel to transport that, and the people who would be happy to see so much carbon leave Earth.

Slashdot Top Deals

% "Every morning, I get up and look through the 'Forbes' list of the richest people in America. If I'm not there, I go to work" -- Robert Orben

Working...