Tag: attribution

Posted on

Quick update from International Digital Curation Conference

Just a quick note from the IDCC given I was introduced as “one of those people who are probably blogging the conference”. I spoke this morning giving a talk on Radical Sharing – Transforming Science? A version of the slides is available at slideshare. It seemed to go reasonably well and I got some positive comments. The highlight for me today was John Wilbanks speaking this evening – John always gives a great talk (slides will also be on his slideshare at some point) and I invariably learn something. Today that was the importance of distinguishing between citation (which is a term from the scholarly community) and attribution (which is a term with specific legal meaning in copyright law). Having used the two interchangeably in my talk (no recording unfortunately) John made the point that it is important to distinguish the two practices, particularly the reasons that motivate themand the different enforcement frameworks.

Interesting talks this afternoon on costing for digital curation – not something I have spent a lot of time thinking about but clearly something that is rather important. Also this morning talks on CARMEN and iPLANT, projects that are delivering on infrastructure for sharing and re-using data. Tonight we are off to Edinburgh castle for the dinner which should be fun and tomorrow I make an early getaway to get to more meetings.

Posted on

Links as the source code of our thinking – Tim O’Reilly

I just wanted to point to a post that Tim O’Reilly wrote just before the US election a few weeks back. There was an interesting discussion about the rights and wrongs of him posting on his political views and the rights and wrongs of that being linked to from the O’Reilly Media front page. In amongst the abuse that you have come to expect in public political discussions there is some thought provoking stuff. But what I wanted to point out and hopefully revive a discussion of is a point he makes right near the bottom.

[I have conflated two levels of comments here (Tim is quoting his own comment) – see the original post for the context]

“Thanks to everyone for wading in, especially those of you who are marshalling reasoned arguments and sharing actual sources and references, showing you’ve done your homework, and helping other people to see the data that helped to shape your point of view. We need a LOT more of that in this discussion, rather than slinging unsupported allegations back and forth.

Bringing this back to tech – showing the data behind your argument is a lot like open source. It’s a way of verifying the “code” that’s inside your head. If you can’t show us your code, it’s a lot harder to trust your results!”

Links as source code for your thinking: that’s a meme that should survive the particulars of this particular debate!

In a sense Tim is advocating the wholesale adoption of the very strong attribution culture we (like to think we) have in academic research. The importance of acknowedging your sources is clear but it also has much more value than that. By tracing back the influences that have brought someone to a specific conclusion or belief it is possible for other people to gain a much deeper insight into how those ideas evolved. Being able to parse the dependencies between ideas, data, samples, papers, and knowledge in an automatic, machine readable, way is the promise of the semantic web, but in the meantime just helping the poor old humans to trace back and understand where someone is coming from is very helpful.