Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Who owns the Data or the question should be, who is manipulating the Data? The article by Alistair Croll on who owns the Data asks big questions but fails short to highlight the fact that there is someone out there manipulating the well intended, innocent data into their own profit motive agendas. Many times, I have received emails, phone calls and SMS from sales people trying to sell me something. How they got my contact details is definitely my guess that someone is busy manipulating the data, I gave away for profit motives. At the end of the article the writer makes an opinion that, we are using the internet for free? Which I disagree, because our data makes and runs the internet. Without our data, the internet will not be the internet. Without our data on Facebook, facebooks or twitter will be blank, no value and worthless. If companies are paying people to participate in surveys and opinions, then it means our free data we upload on the internet, facebook and twitter is a payment for us to use the internet. After all we have to pay to the internet service providers for us to access to use the internet, and face book. Or someone is even suppose to pay for our data, in fact we have made things easy for the marketing people who now just sit behind their laptops and manipulate our free given data for their own consumptions. Or maybe I should console myself that, since the article is old, maybe someone has answered my question?

A mi me pareció que el artículo señala dos puntos centrales, aunque resolver el tema es una empresa peliaguda. El asunto de lo gratuito en un sistema basado en la ganancia y la capacidad de aprovechar los resquicios que abren las situaciones nuevas y una buena dosis de desorientación generalizada: 1. As we use the Internet for "free," we have to remember that if we're not paying for something, we're not the customer. We are in fact the product being sold - or, more specifically, our data is. 2. The important question isn't who owns the data. Ultimately, we all do. A better question is, who owns the means of analysis? Because that's how, as Brand suggests, you get the right information in the right place. The digital divide isn't about who owns data - it's about who can put that data to work. Tal vez, como menciona natashasana, el problema sea más complejo, y reducir la manipulación al negocio deje temas relavantes fuera. Y la información que usan/manipulan es la que todos aportamos. Cierto, pero no todos la usamos o aprovechamos de la misma forma.

The inventor of the world wide web believes an online "Magna Carta" is needed to protect and enshrine the independence of the medium he created and the rights of its users worldwide. Sir Tim Berners-Lee told the Guardian the web had come under increasing attack from governments and corporate influence and that new rules were needed to protect the "open, neutral" system.

Las redes sociales (o medios sociales) permiten establecer conversaciones a modo de rompecabezas, piezas dispersas que ofrecen contornos para convertirse en formas establecidas; imágenes nuevas o conocidas surgen de los trazos que se urden mientras las unidades se colocan una a una. Este diálogo se construyó como un puzzle, pieza a pieza vinculamos ideas; este es el resultado de un intercambio de dudas. Volvemos a la red, se trata de generar conexiones que nos permitan construir conocimiento, aquí el resultado del encuentro:

"Although the official press release highlights that "Open Access publishing has no negative effect on book sales, and increases online usage and discovery considerably" (which is, in my opinion, only a snapshot which will sooner or later lose validity in the course of the ongoing digitalization of the academic book market), the most interesting and valuable outcomes of the pilot arise from the attempt to quantify and itemize the costs of an OA monograph."

Here's some interesting topline figures year 2012 report about the state of intellectual property around the world. It quickly shows us the countries that take the business of innovation & patents seriously. For 2013 World Property Indicators, here's the link: http://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/intproperty/941/wipo_pub_941_2013.pdf

I like how this article breaks down where the patents are coming from in the world. I also like this because it always reminds me of the story (that is likely untrue) that the US patent office was almost closed at the beginning of the 20th century because all the good ideas had already been thought of. Progress marches on!

Learning a new language changes your brain network both structurally and functionally, according to Penn State researchers

Fuente: Yuriy Mazur. PhotoXpress. Para que un estudio sea reconocido por la comunidad científica tiene que aparecer en una revista de impacto. Hasta ahora las instituciones públicas financiaban investigaciones y después tenían que volver a comprar el resultado a los editores de las revistas.

Scientific publishing. Quality vs quantity?

I think the quality of a scientific publication brings more benefits than an amount of irrelevant matters.

I agree! Open publishing is highly important, but having tons of low quality material doesn't serve any good. There should be some guidelines or measures that would ensure accuracy.

I was reading one of the week 12 additional resources, PKP School: Becoming a Reviewer http://pkpschool.sfu.ca/becoming-a-reviewer/ and came across the term Predatory Open Access Publishing. I guess no matter what, someone is going to try to make a buck. There is also a site that others have posted here, http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/ that is where Beall's list is housed. Beall's list is a list of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers - a good place to check if you are thinking of writing or reviewing for a journal, if it's on the list do more digging and research on the journal itself before committing to anything. The journal names all sound pretty impressive so you can't tell by name alone.

This weeks module 6 is about Open Science and Open Data. Within the course provided videos and readings do not provide much on Open Data. This article dives into why Open Data is relevant in Open Science. Citation: Molloy JC (2011) The Open Knowledge Foundation: Open Data Means Better Science. PLoS Biol 9(12): e1001195. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001195 Published: December 6, 2011 Copyright: © 2011 Jennifer C. Molloy. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Open data leads to better science, but a community effort is needed in order to overcoming the barriers to widespread publication and availability of open scientific data.

We embed exciting STEM professionals and cutting-edge research into award-winning, standards-aligned in and out-of-school curricula. Live webcasts connect students with inspirational STEM role models. Student materials include reading selections with read-to-me functionality, inquiry-based labs, videos, and online games.

Mediante un tratamiento trans e interdisciplinar, los estudiantes aprenden ciencias experimentales, matemáticas, ciencias sociales y lenguaje en proyectos conjuntos de experimentacción e investigación, Sería deseable que en el futuro pueda abrirse en código abierto para que pueda trabajarse en todo tipo de tabletas y dispositivos digitales. De todas formas, es un proyecto muy otente para facilitar el aprendizaje más significativo, atractivo y relevante.

The Apache Software Foundation (ASF) has worked with the National Security Agency (NSA) on the release of Niagarafiles (or Nifi, to the initiated) technology designed to "automate data flows" among multiple computer networks. The software is free and open source (so is available to the public) through the Apache Software Foundation.

Some insightful tips into building a strong online presence and impactful brand identity!

Article Title: The CCC Position on Bill C-32, the Copyright Modernization Act

Description: "Fair dealing has played a prominent role in the hearings on Bill C-32, with education and creator groups debating the merits and impact of the proposed reforms.  Unfortunately, much of the discussion has confused rather than clarified the issue with misleading claims about potential losses, inaccurate comments on copyright and Internet materials, and dubious arguments about the compliance of the reforms under international copyright law."