Re: [Discuss] [Instructors] workshop at Monsanto in St Louis in April
This also makes me think of my old volunteer bicycle repair club. We salvaged abandoned bikes and sold them for $50 or $100, just to pay for parts and to increase the chance we were giving the bike to a good owner. We also offered free repair help. Local bike shops had mixed feelings. We may have been targeting a different audience that would eventually start paying for commercial services. We may also have been volunteering to help people for free that would otherwise have paid a professional bike mechanic. On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Michael Selik m...@selik.org wrote: The major question for open-source is how to avoid making a wealth transfer from one set of engineers (the creators of open-source) to another, non-intersecting set (the freeloaders of open-source). For software, there's enough of an intersection between users and creators that the creators appear to gain more in productivity (and thus wages) than they lose to other economic forces. It's hard to know. As I understand it, the existence of Software Carpentry as a non-profit, mostly-volunteer organization stems from the inadequate public funding allocated to scientific research, exacerbated by the awkward structure of higher education and unfortunate circumstances of graduate students. I'd be frustrated if Software Carpentry shifted from trying to alleviate this pain to instead exploiting one group (mostly academics) for the benefit of another (industry scientists and their employers). The morality of volunteering for corporations is comparable to the intersection between the creators and users of open-source training. How many volunteers will benefit economically? How many scientists will face lower wages because some of their peers choose to volunteer? On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Erik Bray erik.m.b...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Greg Wilson gvwil...@software-carpentry.org wrote: 2. Other people have said that corporations should be charged market rates. I'm all in favor of bringing in more money (after all, that's what pays my salary) but what about Harvard? They're sitting on a $29 billion endowment - should we charge them what we charge the Fortune 500? How about small companies: do we ask a start-up less than we ask Monsanto? We've already started down this road by not charging admin fees for workshops in less affluent countries; should the subcommittee that the executive is putting together to regularize fee waivers look at charging market rates for companies, affluent institutions, or some other group? Late to this discussion, so sorry if I'm just rehashing/adding to the noise. But I would like to second this. Individual instructors are of course free to do whatever they feel like, but I would not feel comfortable if SWC were making distinctions about who to send instructors to based on some institutions' abilities to pay or not pay as the case may be (admin fees are another matter, but I don't have strong opinions on that). I don't generally care what the institution is--if there are scientists who need to improve their computing skills I want to help them, so that they can do better science. 3. I take Stephen's point about having a lot more companies knock on our door if word gets out that we can provide high-quality training at low cost, but I actually think that's a good thing. Many of our instructors are considering careers outside academia, and I'd be pleased if we could help them make connections. Yes! This^^^ Best, Erik ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] [Instructors] workshop at Monsanto in St Louis in April
My opinion (an and only my opinion) now is that there has been significant discussion on this topic. I would argue that to spare everyone's inbox, it's now the board's responsibility to react with proposals that are sensitive to the dialogue. The board has been meeting weekly (until this week) to get much of our affairs in order. This discussion is clearly their responsibility to address as offered by our governance bylaws. If you agree, then the path forward would be to give the board a little time to address this and propose a policy. This would also mean it would be most productive to address pressing concerns on this matter to bo...@software-carpentry.orgmailto:bo...@software-carpentry.org or await a blog post that announces some policy. Full disclosure - trying to end my day with an inbox with less than 100 unread emails. Again, just speaking for myself and open to correction if I've done so inappropriately - Jason PS saying this not to be rude, but because I like the sentence in English: if you agree, skip the irony and *don't* reply. Jason Williams Lead - iPlant Collaborative Education, Outreach, and Training DNA Learning Center Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 1 Bungtown Rdx-apple-data-detectors://0/0 Cold Spring Harbor, NY 11724x-apple-data-detectors://0/0 516-367-5186tel:516-367-5186 www.dnalc.orghttp://www.dnalc.org/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] [Instructors] workshop at Monsanto in St Louis in April
The major question for open-source is how to avoid making a wealth transfer from one set of engineers (the creators of open-source) to another, non-intersecting set (the freeloaders of open-source). For software, there's enough of an intersection between users and creators that the creators appear to gain more in productivity (and thus wages) than they lose to other economic forces. It's hard to know. As I understand it, the existence of Software Carpentry as a non-profit, mostly-volunteer organization stems from the inadequate public funding allocated to scientific research, exacerbated by the awkward structure of higher education and unfortunate circumstances of graduate students. I'd be frustrated if Software Carpentry shifted from trying to alleviate this pain to instead exploiting one group (mostly academics) for the benefit of another (industry scientists and their employers). The morality of volunteering for corporations is comparable to the intersection between the creators and users of open-source training. How many volunteers will benefit economically? How many scientists will face lower wages because some of their peers choose to volunteer? On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Erik Bray erik.m.b...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Greg Wilson gvwil...@software-carpentry.org wrote: 2. Other people have said that corporations should be charged market rates. I'm all in favor of bringing in more money (after all, that's what pays my salary) but what about Harvard? They're sitting on a $29 billion endowment - should we charge them what we charge the Fortune 500? How about small companies: do we ask a start-up less than we ask Monsanto? We've already started down this road by not charging admin fees for workshops in less affluent countries; should the subcommittee that the executive is putting together to regularize fee waivers look at charging market rates for companies, affluent institutions, or some other group? Late to this discussion, so sorry if I'm just rehashing/adding to the noise. But I would like to second this. Individual instructors are of course free to do whatever they feel like, but I would not feel comfortable if SWC were making distinctions about who to send instructors to based on some institutions' abilities to pay or not pay as the case may be (admin fees are another matter, but I don't have strong opinions on that). I don't generally care what the institution is--if there are scientists who need to improve their computing skills I want to help them, so that they can do better science. 3. I take Stephen's point about having a lot more companies knock on our door if word gets out that we can provide high-quality training at low cost, but I actually think that's a good thing. Many of our instructors are considering careers outside academia, and I'd be pleased if we could help them make connections. Yes! This^^^ Best, Erik ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] Any SWC Folks in and around San Jose (CA)?
It would be nice to have a calendar or some system for helping Instructors identify in-person meet-up possibilities, esp. at conferences. Jason Williams Lead - iPlant Collaborative Education, Outreach, and Training DNA Learning Center Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 1 Bungtown Rdx-apple-data-detectors://0/0 Cold Spring Harbor, NY 11724x-apple-data-detectors://0/0 516-367-5186tel:516-367-5186 www.dnalc.orghttp://www.dnalc.org/ On Mar 6, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Matt Davis jiffyc...@gmail.commailto:jiffyc...@gmail.com wrote: I emailed Peter off-list, but wanted to point out the SF Python Meetup on March 18 as a possible meeting point: http://www.meetup.com/sfpython/events/220949757/ I'll be giving a tutorial on scientific Python stuff at that meetup if anyone wanted to help with that! Best, Matt On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:05 AM Ted Hart edmund.m.h...@gmail.commailto:edmund.m.h...@gmail.com wrote: I'm on the Peninsula and I'd be happy to meet-up sometime. I know there's more folks in the city too if we could organize a larger group. Best, Ted On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:21 AM Peter Steinbach stein...@mpi-cbg.demailto:stein...@mpi-cbg.de wrote: Hi - I'll be at the GTC2015 at San Jose Convention Center in about a week from now (March 16th to 20th). I was wondering if other SWC Instructors will be there as well to meet up and exchange experiences on teaching the material? As I'll be there the whole week, meeting somewhere close in the bay area is also fine with me. Best, Peter -- Peter Steinbach, Dr. rer. nat. HPC Developer, Scientific Computing Facility Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics Pfotenhauerstr. 108 01307 Dresden Germany phone +49 351 210 2882 fax +49 351 210 1689 www.mpi-cbg.dehttp://www.mpi-cbg.de ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.orgmailto:Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.orgmailto:Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.orgmailto:Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] A useful little Git I just screwed up FAQ
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Greg Wilson gvwil...@software-carpentry.org wrote: On 2015-03-05 11:52 AM, Olav Vahtras wrote: To add some humor: the random git man page generator http://git-man-page-generator.lokaltog.net/ What git may look like to novices :-) I am currently seeking funding for a study to determine whether Git users at _any_ level are able to distinguish these randomly-generated manual pages from the real thing. I am confident that the most common response of subjects will be, Ohgod ohgod make it stop... I can give you some anecdata right now, that as a somewhat experienced git user at this point, I can scarcely determine those from the real thing. The silly option switches I think give it a way a bit (I got --terrorize-subtree which doesn't make sense, because terrorizing is what subtrees do to *users*). But my eyes glaze over the main text about the same rate it does for the actual man pages. Erik ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] [Instructors] workshop at Monsanto in St Louis in April
Just a note on terminology (sorry, I have OCD) before it all gets confused. To clarify, does the suggestion not-for-profit don't pay mean they pay only admin fee not the market rate? And for-profit pay the market (well, whatever SCF will decide it to be) rate? This would solve (?) the issue raised by Raniere. Yes. pgpwVI9cDAoEh.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
[Discuss] Any SWC Folks in and around San Jose (CA)?
Hi - I'll be at the GTC2015 at San Jose Convention Center in about a week from now (March 16th to 20th). I was wondering if other SWC Instructors will be there as well to meet up and exchange experiences on teaching the material? As I'll be there the whole week, meeting somewhere close in the bay area is also fine with me. Best, Peter -- Peter Steinbach, Dr. rer. nat. HPC Developer, Scientific Computing Facility Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics Pfotenhauerstr. 108 01307 Dresden Germany phone +49 351 210 2882 fax +49 351 210 1689 www.mpi-cbg.de ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] Any SWC Folks in and around San Jose (CA)?
I'm on the Peninsula and I'd be happy to meet-up sometime. I know there's more folks in the city too if we could organize a larger group. Best, Ted On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:21 AM Peter Steinbach stein...@mpi-cbg.de wrote: Hi - I'll be at the GTC2015 at San Jose Convention Center in about a week from now (March 16th to 20th). I was wondering if other SWC Instructors will be there as well to meet up and exchange experiences on teaching the material? As I'll be there the whole week, meeting somewhere close in the bay area is also fine with me. Best, Peter -- Peter Steinbach, Dr. rer. nat. HPC Developer, Scientific Computing Facility Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics Pfotenhauerstr. 108 01307 Dresden Germany phone +49 351 210 2882 fax +49 351 210 1689 www.mpi-cbg.de ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists. software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] A useful little Git I just screwed up FAQ
bad joke On Mar 6, 2015, at 10:14, Erik Bray erik.m.b...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Greg Wilson gvwil...@software-carpentry.org wrote: On 2015-03-05 11:52 AM, Olav Vahtras wrote: To add some humor: the random git man page generator http://git-man-page-generator.lokaltog.net/ What git may look like to novices :-) I am currently seeking funding for a study to determine whether Git users at _any_ level are able to distinguish these randomly-generated manual pages from the real thing. I am confident that the most common response of subjects will be, Ohgod ohgod make it stop... I can give you some anecdata right now, that as a somewhat experienced git user at this point, I can scarcely determine those from the real thing. The silly option switches I think give it a way a bit (I got --terrorize-subtree which doesn't make sense, because terrorizing is what subtrees do to *users*). But my eyes glaze over the main text about the same rate it does for the actual man pages. Erik There's a `git bash` joke in here somewhere. I am confident of it. /bad joke Thanks everyone for indulging me. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
Re: [Discuss] Any SWC Folks in and around San Jose (CA)?
I emailed Peter off-list, but wanted to point out the SF Python Meetup on March 18 as a possible meeting point: http://www.meetup.com/sfpython/events/220949757/ I'll be giving a tutorial on scientific Python stuff at that meetup if anyone wanted to help with that! Best, Matt On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:05 AM Ted Hart edmund.m.h...@gmail.com wrote: I'm on the Peninsula and I'd be happy to meet-up sometime. I know there's more folks in the city too if we could organize a larger group. Best, Ted On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:21 AM Peter Steinbach stein...@mpi-cbg.de wrote: Hi - I'll be at the GTC2015 at San Jose Convention Center in about a week from now (March 16th to 20th). I was wondering if other SWC Instructors will be there as well to meet up and exchange experiences on teaching the material? As I'll be there the whole week, meeting somewhere close in the bay area is also fine with me. Best, Peter -- Peter Steinbach, Dr. rer. nat. HPC Developer, Scientific Computing Facility Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics Pfotenhauerstr. 108 01307 Dresden Germany phone +49 351 210 2882 fax +49 351 210 1689 www.mpi-cbg.de ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists. software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists. software-carpentry.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
