Well it seems like a utopian model, but at the same time in academics you
are judged on your papers and grants. So without some exclusivity it is
difficult for academics to cope.
Obviously with a study that couldn't be done without a great deal of cash,
collaborations are vital...but as much as
HI Matt,
I hear ya, however, it may be time for a change. Data are already out
there, being shared and reused, and the trend is increasing. So, we
either figure out ways to recognize and reward "sharing" or suffer the
ultimate consequences... In the end, it will become clear (I believe)
I read this article with great pleasure yesterday and immediately planned to
blog about it on http://www.w3.org/blog/hcls. It is actually shocking that
such an article comes as a revelation but good news nonetheless. How can we
discover new (or old) knowledge from data integration if we have no acc
hcls; [ontolog-forum]; ontolog...@lists.open-bio.org;
Joanne Luciano (gmail)
Subject: Re: NYT Rare Sharing of Data Leads to Progress on Alzheimer’s
Published: August 12, 2010
> "The key to a collaborative Alzheimer’s project was an ambitious
> agreement to share all the data, making e
"The key to a collaborative Alzheimer’s project was an ambitious
agreement to share all the data, making every single finding public
immediately."
Amen to that! :-)
M
--
--
Dr. Mark Wilkinson
Assistant Professor, Medical Genetics
PI Bioinformatics, Heart + Lung Institute
St. Paul's Ho
I thought many of you would enjoy seeing this article from the NYT. Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/health/research/13alzheimer.html "The key to a collaborative Alzheimer’s project was an ambitious agreement to share all the data, making every single finding public immediately.
