Downloaded 119 times
Uploaded byCameron Neylon
What has the public ever done for us...?
Cameron Neylon's talk explores the relationship between public funding and scientific communication, emphasizing the need for real engagement and maximizing the impact of scientific work. He critiques traditional publishing and peer review systems as outdated and advocates for open data and processes to improve accessibility and public understanding. Ultimately, Neylon stresses the importance of optimizing communication strategies to enhance public investment in science and encourage widespread contributions.
More Related Content
Similar to What has the public ever done for us...?
What has the public ever done for us...?
- 1. What has thepublic ever done for us? Cameron Neylon - BioGeeks Tech Meet - London - 18 June 2010 http://www.flickr.com/photos/untitlism/22800371 CC-BY
- 2. Disclaimer... The opinions expressedin this talk are the personal views of the speaker given as a private citizen and should not under any circumstances be taken as indicative of STFC, RCUK, or UK government policy or of any current or past discussions of future policy....
- 3. @communicating Plausible Accuracy PIERRE LINDENBAUM Mummi Thorissson John Fabiana Kubke Richard Grant Pedro Beltrao Neil Saunders Steve Wilson @gnat Branwen Hide Simon Coles Dupuis Simon Philips Pawel Szcsesny Paul Miller Tony Hey Jeremy Frey Nico Adams Richard Akerman Cavalli Gabriel JonMat Todd Stephen BrennerTim O’Reilly Noel Gorelick Dave de Roure Rich Apodaca Udell ISIS LSS Group Jeremiah Faith Jean-Claude Bradley Nicholas Cole Michael Barton JOHN WILLINSKY Phil Lord Victoria Stodden Martyn Bull Gilles Friedmann Stephen Friend David CrottyClay Shirky @t John Cumbers Bora Chris Leonard Grace BaynesEva Amsen Egon Willighagen Mark Borkum Brian Kelly Tony Williams Dan Hagon Maxine Clarke Andrew Milsted Zivkovic Mitch Koch Lab Michael Nielsen Josh Sommers Martin Fenner Steph Hannon Ant Beck WaldropGreg Wilson Brian Matthews Leigh Dodds Bill Hooker Glyn Moody Yaroslav Nikolaev Jenny Rohn Rafael Sidi Lee Smolin Frank NormanRicardo Vidal Iain Emsley Paulo Nuin Ariel Waldmann Timo HannayKen Shankland Lorie LeJeune Jonathan Gray PT Sefton Microsoft STFC Deepak Singh Shirley Wu ISIS Computing Group Helen Berman Andrew Peter Binfield Benjamin Good Dorothea Salo Liz Lyons PLoS Kasarskis Jen Dodd Lee Dirks Peter Murray-Rust Richard Akerman Carole Goble Jon Eisen Jenny Hale Lakshmi Shastry Steve Koch NPG Ben Goldacre Chad OrzelBill Flanagan Jon Tansley Michael Eisen Matt Wood SciFoo 2008/9 Friendfeed Hope Leman Rufus Pollock Victor HenningGoogle Björn Brembs Jo BadgeAllyson Lister Lisa Green TIM HUBBARD Rebecca Goulding campers Euan Adie John Andy Powell Harry Collins Gavin Bell Jim Downing Matt Johnson Wilbanks Mike Ellis DUNCAN HULL Garret Lisi Jamie McQuay ALAN CANN Catherine Jones Andrew Farke Gavin Baker Peter Suber Sabine HossenfelderFlickr The BioGangKevin KellyPaul Walk Arfon Smith Kaitlin Thaney Richard Curry Atilla Csordas Ian Mulvany
- 4.
- 5.
- 6. Why do wedo science?
- 7. Why do theypay?
- 8. Why do theypay? http://www.flickr.com/photos/mararie/3313582639/ CC-BY-SA
- 9. Why do theypay? w e http://www.flickr.com/photos/mararie/3313582639/ CC-BY-SA
- 10.
- 11.
- 12. http://www.flickr.com/photos/penmachine/2109311458/ ...excitement
- 13. Why do Ido it?
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
- 17. This is aprivilege.
- 18.
- 20. My aim isto...
- 21.
- 22. ...through my workor through enabling others.
- 23.
- 24. and how do you measure it? http://www.flickr.com/photos/pinksherbet/3209939998
- 25. I don’t havea good answer... http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattymatt/3017263513
- 26. But at leastfocus on...
- 27.
- 28. I work mainlyon technique development and enabling technologies
- 29. I aim tomaximise the ability of people to (re-)use my work
- 30.
- 32.
- 35.
- 36.
- 37.
- 38.
- 39. ...at least that’sthe aim...
- 40. What about papers... or peer review? http://flickr.com/photos/nicmcphee/2756494307/ CC_BY
- 41. “Publication in traditional journalsrepresents the state of the art for scientific communication...”
- 42. “...if you areusing 17th century technology” Michael Nielsen
- 43. £25B on publication? £2B on peer review? http://www.rin.ac.uk
- 44. The web makespublishing easy
- 45.
- 46.
- 47. ...real engagement isharder http://www.flickr.com/photos/missrogue/107787363
- 48. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tranchis/3708549622 Less of this...
- 49.
- 50.
- 51. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamescridland/613445810 CC-BY ...we are the public...
- 52.
- 54. 21C rate ofinformation... http://www.flickr.com/photos/dylanroscover/3450505729 CC-BY-SA
- 55. ...with 19C filter systems http://www.flickr.com/photos/daveyll/332723930
- 56.
- 57.
- 58. ...build the righttools http://www.flickr.com/photos/wheatfields/3408358703 CC-BY
- 59. Maximise the returnon the public investment
- 60.
- 61.
- 62.
- 64.
- 65. we can communicateand engage... http://www.flickr.com/photos/yourdon/3088582622
- 66. Will we wantto? http://www.flickr.com/photos/66164549@N00/2162663143
- 67.
- 68. Because every timea permanent job is advertised...
- 69.
- 70. The one withthe most Nature papers gets to mate... http://www.flickr.com/photos/t3rmin4t0r/3947963283 CC-BY
- 71. None of thiswill get you a job or funding...at least not yet.
- 72.
- 73. ...so who’s goingfirst then? http://www.flickr.com/photos/divemasterking2000/3827673841
- 74. We need theright incentives... http://www.flickr.com/photos/daquellamanera/3238300837 CC-BY
- 75.
- 76.
- 77. But that hasto come from the top... http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonythemisfit/3033524024 CC-BY
- 79. If we getthis right... http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidcjones/1422043515
- 82.
- 83. ...of champions andadvocates...
- 84.
- 85. And if weget it wrong...? http://www.flickr.com/photos/phobia/2308371224 CC-BY-SA
- 87. But this isthe media’s fault! http://www.flickr.com/photos/secretlondon/3104523439 CC-BY-SA Nothing to do with us right?
- 88.
- 89. “It’s too muchwork to make the information available” “I don’t want it to get into the hands of people who might misuse or misunderstand it” “Properly qualified experts need to look over it first.”
- 90. “It’s too muchwork to make the information available” From a sc i e ntist? “I don’t want it to get into the hands of people who might misuse or misunderstand it” “Properly qualified experts need to look over it first.”
- 91. “It’s too muchwork to make the information available” “I don’t want it to get into the hands of people who might misuse or misunderstand it” From a po li t i cian? “Properly qualified experts need to look over it first.”
- 92. “It’s too muchwork to make the information available” From the CEO of BP ? “I don’t want it to get into the hands of people who might misuse or misunderstand it” “Properly qualified experts need to look over it first.”
- 93. You expect government information to be free.
- 94. You expect publichealth information to be free.
- 95. You expect company informationto be free.
- 96. What made youthink your science was any different?
- 98. We need tomaximise impact... http://www.flickr.com/photos/meesterdickey/2581274092 CC-BY
- 99. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tracy_olson/61056391 CC-BY-SA ...and return on investment
- 100. Real public engagement can help with this...
- 101.
- 102.
- 103. ...and a lotless of this http://www.flickr.com/photos/tammra/283690669/
- 104. If we’re notwilling to optimize our systems of communication....
- 105. ...away from scoringpoints and towards being useful http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmrosenfeld/3336899689 CC-BY
- 106. If we’re notleveraging the web to get the widest possible range of contributions...
- 107. ...then we areheaded for serious trouble http://www.flickr.com/photos/misserion/2275742553 CC-BY
- 108. The argument won’tbe whether science budgets go up or down... http://www.flickr.com/photos/joeshlabotnik/2384490016 CC-BY
- 109. ...but whether thereis one
- 110. And to behonest...
- 111. ...its not clearto me that we will deserve one
- 112. You are freeto: Copy, share, adapt, or re-mix; Photograph, film, or broadcast; Blog, live-blog, or post video of; This presentation. Provided that: You attribute the work to its author and respect the rights and licenses associated with its components.