Web2.0

The Interactive Web, Science, and Education
topics including: collaborating online, social networking, wikis, blogs, open access, open science

media type="custom" key="2852431"

media type="custom" key="2840103"

media type="custom" key="2781615"

media type="custom" key="2128201"

media type="custom" key="2129743"

[|Small Worlds] "This project will facilitate the construction of online professional networks using freely available Web 2.0 tools to support the development of early career stage laboratory scientists in the Life and Physical Sciences."

media type="custom" key="2094395" .

via [|Bitesize Bio] 101008- [|**Social networking - are we social enough?**] Jonathan Gitlin at //Nobel Intent// ponders whether scientists will buy into social networking, a timely article in light of the recent launch of [|the Small Worlds project].

Excerpt from [|Blog Post].

And for a final musing, I seem to have become pre-occupied with the whole Science 2.0 thing and how to best leverage this in the lab and [|classroom] (more on that later)… In the lab, obviously I have adopted the Tumblr platform (now with comments) which I guess is needed for the social side of 2.0. This did not go over well in the classroom, but for the lab seems to make since given the low-low overhead and simplicity. There are a[| lot of Science related networking tools] out there. Some new ones include [|Mendeley], which is said to have the one minor feature [|Papers] (what I use) is missing- online sharing. Even [|Geneious] (the only other program I purchased) has an IM feature and you can Collaborate with other users. I will say [|FriendFeed] is the furthest I have gone done the social scene, and while several people use it as a [|tool for science] networking, I have not stuck my toe in that far. Does seem to have useful info [[|example]]. Once again, FF has low to no overhead. In other words, minimal clicking. Here is a [|great post] on the future of online collaboration in research. Bringing the concept back to the one little corner of FTR: I guess I am thinking more along the lines of open access as opposed to social (or some type of fine mash?). We have some things in the works, how well this works out, not sure yet. Well maybe I will re-visit this in another post. Now I have to go participate in what I am referring to. — SR.

Related [|Blog Post]

[|Open science]
[|A prior post] brought up the concept of open science and networking, two things that are closely linked. To take one thing first, I thought I would list avenues by which we attempt to be “open”— whether this openess is bettering science is worthy of debate but that is the driving force. A secondary benefit of this is that it becomes easier to track progress (or lack there of) locally. Specifically this can cut down on email and leave “face-time” for meaningful discussion of ideas. What are we doing to increase openess? One is this tumblelog. In terms of the inner lab workings? [|protocols], [|primer databases], and [|some purchasing info] (hopefully not enough that we are bled dry) is out there. Raw data is “published” in a couple of fashions. Starting about 6 months ago, [|sequence data and annotations] was made available via wet genes. Of course every once in a while you will see some raw (right off the box) stuff on this tumblelog. For a little more refined format, last month, one of the [|project website (related to Vibrio tubiashii)] was updated with a “live research blog”. Just as with other choices, ease of use on our end was one important factor — text / photo is simply added to [|a shared google doc]. The precursor to this was the more polished [|Oyster disease research webpage.] In the future expect to see something similar to the Vibrio research log on the octopus endevours. These latter examples are basically a topic specific lab notebook, not covering everything one (or more ) might do in the lab but rather directed with minimal polish. In the future might there be some sort of daily summary / with highlights (ie images with explanation? Maybe tweets? I do not see this is a viable options- in our line of research images usually sum up success and failures. Could it be as simple as a flickr stream or group? Thoughts? —SR [|0 Comments]

.

media type="custom" key="2728597"

media type="custom" key="2781335"

[|From Twitter to Wikis in Plain English: A series of videos] //ScienceRoll//
media type="custom" key="2664003"

rss url="http://feeds.delicious.com/v2/rss/sr320/web2.0" link="true" number="10"