Re: Presentation BlueHats (french workshop)
Hi Ludo, Thank you for reviewing and pushing. If you have a tight slot of time, you could add the 2 missing files: talks/fosdem-2017/hpc/images/shrink-wrap.jpg talks/fosdem-2017/hpc/images/shrink-wrap2.png I think they are on your machine 'ribbon'. ;-) On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 23:07, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > It’s nice you were able to talk at POSS. I suppose the audience was not > necessarily familiar with reproducible science, right? To be exact, a subset of POSS. :-) Yes, they were not, at all! Interesting "exercise". :-) > > To guarantee Reproducible Science in the modern age of data, we need to > > guarantee several items, especially: > > 1. Open Articles > > 2. Open Data > > 3. Open Source > > 4. Controlled computing environment (open, too) > > Today, initiatives have been starting, to name some, about 1. > > [[http://rescience.github.io/][ReScience journal]] > > or french specific [[https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/][HAL]], 2. > > [[https://zenodo.org/][Zenodo]] and 3. > > [[https://www.softwareheritage.org/][Software Heritage]]. > > Yup! Not a fan of “open” which I find confusing here, but definitely a > fan of putting all this in perspective! Héhé! Currently, Open sounds to people; they have a vague concept in mind because all the marketing around. For example, the French archive says: "The open archive HAL". :-) Another example, ReScience uses "open" [1] and speaks about "open source community" [2]. [1] http://rescience.github.io/ [2] http://rescience.github.io/board/ Yet another example from Software Heritage [3]: Open Access repo, Open Data Sets repo, Open Source repo. [3] https://www.softwareheritage.org/mission/science/ Well, the message is: everything needs to be transparent; and Open is the vector to hook the message. I am not sure that enter in the technical debate about free / libre vs open is relevant when speaking about Reproducible Science. Philosophically speaking, the code used in Science needs only freedom 0 and freedom 1 to then claim be Reproducible Science, IMHO. And it is what I understand from the paragraph 'Proprietary Software' of your article [3]. ;-) [3] https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01161771v2/document The conclusion is: naming is hard! ;-) Hope to be able to discuss more on these topics here or there because they really matter. Thank you again. Cheers, simon
Re: Presentation BlueHats (french workshop)
Hi zimoun, zimoun skribis: > Attached 2 patches for the repo 'maintenance'. > 1. Fixing broken links in talks/ > 2. My slides These had fallen through the holiday cracks, but I’ve finally pushed it! > This talk was in French with a slot of 5-7 minutes, questions included. It > was > taken in a full day satellite to Paris Open Source Summit. The initiative was > lead by Bastien Guerry from https://www.etalab.gouv.fr/. More information of > the programme > [[https://forum.etalab.gouv.fr/t/journee-bluehats-lors-du-paris-open-source-summit-le-11-decembre-2019/4614][here]]. > > The slot was very short and the audience very heterogeneous; especially about > the day-to-day concerns. As an engineer working in an institute doing > research > in biology, I have tried to explain what is the Reproducible Science challenge > in the modern age of data. > > In short, today a scientific result is an experiment producing data *and* a > numerical processing. From what I am seeing, the experimental part is more or > less well described, or let say that people in labs are aware of its > importance > because they have already several decades (even more) of collective learning. > > However, not enough people take care about the numerical processing. Mainly, > in > my opinion, because we are living a scientific paradigm shift. From what I am > seeing, more than often, it is not understood that more scientific value is in > the numerical process than really in the data itself (or how they are > produced). > Even if I am fully biased because computing is my job and I understand nothing > about labs. It’s nice you were able to talk at POSS. I suppose the audience was not necessarily familiar with reproducible science, right? > To guarantee Reproducible Science in the modern age of data, we need to > guarantee several items, especially: > 1. Open Articles > 2. Open Data > 3. Open Source > 4. Controlled computing environment (open, too) > Today, initiatives have been starting, to name some, about 1. > [[http://rescience.github.io/][ReScience journal]] > or french specific [[https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/][HAL]], 2. > [[https://zenodo.org/][Zenodo]] and 3. > [[https://www.softwareheritage.org/][Software Heritage]]. Yup! Not a fan of “open” which I find confusing here, but definitely a fan of putting all this in perspective! Thanks for sharing! Ludo’.