Hot take: #bropenscience *is* sexist...and alienates the very people that we want on our side. Science is, objectively, dominated by men, but I'm not sure this is the right approach. It feels a little bit like if we got called "lady scientists". Dismissed by gender.
-
-
"FOSS projects are voluntary associations. They are self-governing — not always perfectly democratic, but with community involvement in the governing."
-
"Quietly, without fuss, FOSS projects everywhere have implemented almost point by point the characteristics of the type of Anarchism that was tried in Catalan during the Spanish Civil War."
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This seems like a place where the term "open science" is ambiguous -- FOSS doesn't necessarily have anything to do with efforts to prevent p-hacking, and vice versa. Thus debates about whether "open science" is political can be like ships passing in the night.
-
With respect, I think this is way off base. The open science movement is strongly aligned with efforts to defeat the licensing structures of the publishing industry. The parallels with the aims of FOSS in this respect are very strong.
-
Not sure I follow? Defeating licensing structures etc. doesn't have anything to do with p-hacking either. One can imagine eliminating p-hacking with Elsevier owning the world; one can imagine destroying Elsevier (and all other publishers) but with every article p-hacked.
-
Open science is not just about p-hacking. It's a very broad umbrella that contains a multitude of reforms that work towards separate aim.
-
Exactly! That's my point. That's why one person can say, "Open science [meaning FOSS] is inherently political because it opposes copyright, etc.," while someone else says, "No, why would open science [meaning preregistration and anti-p-hacking] be political?"
-
Ah, yes I misunderstood you. Yes lots of ambiguity here, but I think that when one has a pretty broad view of what Open science means, it's hard to think of it as just p-hacking prophylaxis. Some might, but that's inaccurate.
-
Yes, the reproducibility crisis and "defeating" p-hacking are not the same as open science nor open source.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
& this is an example of a try to place the OSS movement on the left. A less good try though, since one of the arguments (on self-governing) actually is a quite rightist initiative (see e.g. anarcho-capitalism).
-
Back when I actually followed this sort of thing (circa 1990), the split seemed to be between the Richard Stallman lefties and the Eric Raymond "mom's basement" libertarians. This was in the days when a license for the FORTRAN compiler on a decent-sized VAX cost around $20,000.
-
Somewhere on a TK50 cartridge is the code I wrote to bypass DEC's license enforcement code, which I wrote bc my employer couldn't get DEC to send the certificates for stuff they had paid for. It was astonishingly easy to work around.
-
Probably very little of this is relevant to the debate at hand, of course, but it's nice to reminisce.pic.twitter.com/94ofgNlDdQ
-
Just remembered that I broke DEC's security in two ways. One allowed me to generate valid paper license certificates with 16(?)-character keys that worked, the other let me load a memory image of a valid key. Had there been a dark web then I could probably have made serious $$$.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.