OKMOOC

Open Library is an open project: the software is open, the data are open, the documentation is open. Whether you fix a typo, add a book, or write a widget--it's all welcome. Open Library is a project of the non-profit Internet Archive, and has been funded in part by a grant from the California State Library and the Kahle/Austin Foundation.

Very good and will be helpful to all

Welcome to Open Library! Looking for accessible books in the DAISY format? View our accessible book subject page, or search for accessible books.

Un post (en inglés) en el que se hace una crítica sobre el proceso de revisión por pares para las publicaciones científicas.

En realidad, muchas veces el sistema de revisión queda un poco en entredicho cuando el peso de uno de los autores puede hacer que el artículo se publique casi sólo. Otras veces, al proponer a revisores, lógicamente la propuesta se hace a revisores amigos que pueden ser algo más subjetivos a la hora de revisar tu artículo. Sin embargo, cuando empiezas de cero, y tu nombre no tiene aún ningún peso, tienes que tener un trabajo muy muy bueno para que pueda ser aceptado. Aún así, parece ser el método menos malo que conocemos para garantizar la objetividad. Esto no quita a que hay revisores muy buenos, de los cuáles se aprende y el artículo enviado se ve enriquecido. Y, como digo, también es positivo la rapidez a la hora de evaluar un artículo, teniendo en cuenta que el trabajo de revisión es siempre desinteresado (yo intento revisar en las fechas que me imponen con el objetivo de que cuando yo mande un nuevo trabajo susceptible de ser publicado, pueda ser revisado también en los plazos estipulados por la revista). Saludos. Antonio.

Wikipedia and its stated ambition to "compile the sum of all human knowledge" are in trouble.

This article shows some aspects that lead to the fact that Wikipedia is not yet accepted as a resource in sciences.

This article is interesting. It explains the problems encountered in its sustainability of Wikipedia. Great work and great achievement. It is prime source of information for public even though it's "compile the sum of all human knowledge" are in trouble

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!

"A recent story in the Chronicle of Higher Education covers a phenomenon all of us have suspected, mainly because we've seen it via our editorial boards and editorial advisors - the proliferation of open access (OA) publishers with new names, unknown pedigrees, big promises, and fulsome editorial boards, which often spam our editors and advisors with offers to join the parade." This article does a good job of outlining the pitfalls of the author pay model of open access journals. With open access journals the whole idea is to make it so that information is accessible to the public, but unfortunately that access comes with a cost. The cost of predatory open access journal undermines the whole democratic and altruistic intent behind open access journals. By taking advantage of recently endowed academics these predatory publishers cause many problems for both the individuals affected as well as the Open publishing industry. I also like how there is a clear definition of what predatory open access publishing is.

The home of the U.S. Government's open data Here you will find data, tools, and resources to conduct research, develop web and mobile applications, design data visualizations, and more. This tool is very powerful for researchers that may not access to the funds and resources of researchers from well funded universities or that of the US Government. This resources breaks the data out into 21 different topics covering areas from education to the ocean. Each section has data sets to choose from and access to grant information as well as articles and updates on each topic. Even it you are someone that does not have the capacity to use these resources, I believe that it is good to know where to find this source so that you can share it with others, or perhaps one day you will have the ability to use this resource more fully.

It's common knowledge that the amount of online rich media consumption is increasing exponentially on an annual basis. But how much video traffic is projected over the next five years? And what does this growth really mean for global residential, business, and mobile subscribers and the service providers that support them? I have used this infographic many times since I have found it. There are times in presentations or when trying to educate people on the size and scope of the internet that words do not do enough. The pictures and numbers and scaling provided by this infographic conveys the message quite well even if the numbers are losing their meaning because they are so large. The other important part of this infographic is that is is updated constantly. When I first found this link it was referring to the year 2014, as of this post it is now referencing 2015 and what will be available on line at that time.

Roopika Risam puts forth an argument that digital publication is not merely a new platform in which to carry out traditional academic actives. Rather, Risam proposes three ways in which digital scholarship is distinct from print, fundamentally shifting the values potentially underlying the academy: (1) it tends towards more collaboration (2) it is an iterative process, rarely considered "finished", and (3) it is frequently more public. Risam notes that these new principles do not guarantee dramatic shifts in the academy, and there are efforts to systematize these features in order to make digital scholarship more closely reflect the principles in print scholarship. Yet, it is emphasized we are at a point in time where we have the opportunity to be clear enough about the ways digital scholarship differs from print scholarship in order to decent and uplift these qualities rather than try to transform them to better resemble print scholarship.

Who has heard of this festival about Open Knowledge? Who has been there?

This article provides a brief historical contextualization of different forms of peer review. It does well to highlight not only pros and cons of the various processes, but it also discusses the positions from which these pros and cons come form. For example, gender is discussed, revealing that women frequently advocate for anonymous peer review due to the sexism they encounter leading to their work not being published. Another aspect that the authors engage with is how the technologies available shape the forms that peer review takes.

Proposes an alternative future where author self-publish their work for peer review outside of traditional journals.

Si, porque también se menciona, como dice en su proposición, Harvie et al. (2014) hacen un magnífico trabajo que describe los hechos exasperantes de la actual académico panorama editorial. Todos sabemos cómo funciona el sistema y cómo se juega el juego. Lo que se quiere dar a conocer una realidad alternativa facilitada por la plataforma de revisión por pares abierto gratuito, libre y sugerir acciones concretas que ayuden al movimiento científico comunidad hacia un sistema de evaluación de conocimientos y el intercambio más abierto y eficiente que se divorcia de revisión por pares desde la publicación de revistas.

The proposed alternative future is achievable, but not without resistance of traditional publishing, I think.

Social reading is everything that surrounds the experience of reading electronic books (ebooks).

Explanation of social reading is excellent - brief and clear.

"Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?" So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey .

SHERPA/RoMEO database of publishers' policies on copyright and self-archiving

Thank you for sharing. It is a valuable resource for researchers who want to publish their papers and also to librarians.

By: Thomson Reuters Foundation Nairobi - Mobile phones and other technological innovations can be "game changers" in securing children's rights, the United Nations children's agency Unicef said at the launch of its first crowd-sourced report on Thursday.

Mooc is a sign and pioneer of open knowledge,but since it was born, it has had a bunch of problems. MOOC appeal to open access and open intellectual property, however, MOOC even has problem with their teacher who produce course in MOOC. Open is a good but ideal concept, but society needs time to change the logic and be more selfless to be open.

MOOC is licensed under Creative Common license.

If the University invested money in the project , they may feel they have aright to the MOOCs. Are MOOC, Profs and academics are very quick to use IP to avoid sharing their Knowledge.