|
Science 2.0: The Edge of Reason? |
|
|
|
Dr. Samuel Says -
Arts & Science
|
|
Written by Dr. Samuel Centralia, Ph.D., D.D.S., Esq.
|
|
Wednesday, 23 January 2008 |
More from the meta-weirdness beat: Clearly, information is moving around in profoundly different ways in the Internet Age. Virtually every aspect of communication, personal and mass, is changing -- and I don't use the word "virtually" coincidentally.
Blogs and wikis are fundamentally changing the nature of publishing, in
terms of both the medium and the message. Fiction, autobiography, all
manner of journalism and "professional" criticism -- everything is
switching up. Then there are the various end-user hardware formats --
phones, PDAs, eBooks -- that threaten to eliminate paper-based
publishing for good.
But what about Science, with a capital "S"? Certainly the most
demanding and heavily scrutinized type of publishing, what with peer
reviews and the scientific method and all, Big Science will surely
resist the wiki-ization movement, right? Well, check out this
alarmingly meta project over at Scientific American. It's a "networked
journalism" initiative in which readers are invited to comment upon and
shape the story before it's published. And what is the story itself
about? It's a "feature story on Science 2.0, which describes how
researchers are beginning to harness wikis, blogs and other Web 2.0
technologies as a potentially transformative way of doing science."
My brain hurts just thinking about it, and I'm rather deeply invested
in this sort of thing. That's the risk you run getting into the
technology/communications/science/culture racket. I should have stuck
with baseball.
Meanwhile, filmmaker David Lynch would like to share one particularly incisive and NSFW thought with you.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
