Jozef Imrich, name worthy of Kafka, has his finger on the pulse of any irony of interest and shares his findings to keep you in-the-know with the savviest trend setters and infomaniacs.
''I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center.''
This Week: Is there a correlation between value and attention in the arts?… Data’s in: the plus/minuses of live-streaming… Some ideas from a researcher on measuring aesthetic experience… How might the arts weigh in on politics without being dismissed?
Client engagement: Diane Arbus cultivated a bond between subject and photographer. She propositioned strangers -- to take their pictures and to sleep with them... Bohemian Babushka
“Social media has created networked communication channels that facilitate interactions and allow information to proliferate within professional academic communities as well as in informal social circumstances. A significant contemporary discussion in the field of science communication is how scientists are using (or might use) social media to communicate their research. This includes the role of social media in facilitating the exchange of knowledge internally within and among scientific communities, as well as externally for outreach to engage the public. This study investigates how a surveyed sample of 587 scientists from a variety of academic disciplines, but predominantly the academic life sciences, use social media to communicate internally and externally. Our results demonstrate that while social media usage has yet to be widely adopted, scientists in a variety of disciplines use these platforms to exchange scientific knowledge, generally via either Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, or blogs. Despite the low frequency of use, our work evidences that scientists perceive numerous potential advantages to using social media in the workplace. Our data provides a baseline from which to assess future trends in social media use within the science academy.”
Using metadata actively, Colin Bird, Simon Coles, Iris Garrelfs, Tom Griffin, Magnus Hagdorn, Graham Klyne, Mike Mineter, Cerys Willoughby 2016, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 76-85 doi:10.2218/ijdc.v11i1.412
“Almost all researchers collect and preserve metadata, although doing
so is often seen as a burden. However, when that metadata can be, and
is, used actively during an investigation or creative process, the
benefits become apparent instantly. Active use can arise in various
ways, several of which are being investigated by the Collaboration for
Research Enhancement by Active use of Metadata (CREAM) project, which
was funded by Jisc as part of their Research Data Spring initiative. The
CREAM project is exploring the concept through understanding the active
use of metadata by the partners in the collaboration. This paper
explains what it means to use metadata actively and describes how the
CREAM project characterises active use by developing use cases that
involve documenting the key decision points during a process.
Well-documented processes are accordingly more transparent,
reproducible, and reusable.”