diff options
| author | Yuchen Pei <me@ypei.me> | 2018-04-29 19:36:26 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Yuchen Pei <me@ypei.me> | 2018-04-29 19:36:26 +0200 |
| commit | 60e020ac68d560123572c05feca2229706d8eaf9 (patch) | |
| tree | 2224e209d4ebf071d9df1b38c1da39d0b370aeda /posts | |
| parent | c61f65701b6304ae82b41bb59acc39ef7d3d2502 (diff) | |
added isso; removed site from gitignore
Diffstat (limited to 'posts')
| -rw-r--r-- | posts/2018-04-10-update-open-research.md | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/posts/2018-04-10-update-open-research.md b/posts/2018-04-10-update-open-research.md index e0acb64..f1df7bf 100644 --- a/posts/2018-04-10-update-open-research.md +++ b/posts/2018-04-10-update-open-research.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ date: 2018-04-28 title: Updates on open research --- -It has been 8 months since I last wrote about open (maths) research. Since then two things happened which prompted me to write an update. +It has been 9 months since I last wrote about open (maths) research. Since then two things happened which prompted me to write an update. As always I discuss open research only in mathematics, not because I think it should not be applied to other disciplines, but simply because I do not have experience nor sufficient interests in non-mathematical subjects. @@ -64,4 +64,4 @@ During the workshop many efforts for open research were mentioned, and afterward In a conversation during the workshop, one of the participants called open science "normal science", because reproducibility, open access, collaborations, and fair attributions are all what science is supposed to be, and practices like treating the readers as buyers rather than users should be called "bad science", rather than "closed science". -To which an organiser replied: maybe we should rename the workshop "Not-bad science".
\ No newline at end of file +To which an organiser replied: maybe we should rename the workshop "Not-bad science". |