Skip to main content
 

I've never met Mark, but we both seem to like to read a lot of the same stuff within math & science. Glad to have you join in on the fun.

If you're interested in information theory and complexity as they relate to biology/microbiology, you might find my Mendeley.com group of interest: https://www.mendeley.com/groups/2545131/itbio-information-theory-microbiology-evolution-and-complexity/

I'm curious if you use a journal aggregation tool and, if so, how you fit it into your workflow?

I also keep some additional static resources on my "blog" cum "online notebook" at http://www.boffosocko.com. A lot of the more technical stuff in the feed from here is piped automatically into my twitter feed.

 

Disconnected, fragmented, or united? a trans-disciplinary review of network science by Cesar Hidalgo

Hidalgo, C.A. Appl Netw Sci (2016) 1: 6. doi:10.1007/s41109-016-0010-3

Abstract

During decades the study of networks has been divided between the efforts of social scientists and natural scientists, two groups of scholars who often do not see eye to eye. In this review I present an effort to mutually translate the work conducted by scholars from both of these academic fronts hoping to continue to unify what has become a diverging body of literature. I argue that social and natural scientists fail to see eye to eye because they have diverging academic goals. Social scientists focus on explaining how context specific social and economic mechanisms drive the structure of networks and on how networks shape social and economic outcomes. By contrast, natural scientists focus primarily on modeling network characteristics that are independent of context, since their focus is to identify universal characteristics of systems instead of context specific mechanisms. In the following pages I discuss the differences between both of these literatures by summarizing the parallel theories advanced to explain link formation and the applications used by scholars in each field to justify their approach to network science. I conclude by providing an outlook on how these literatures can be further unified.

 
 
 

Our nine-point guide to spotting a dodgy statistic | Science | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jul/17/politicians-dodgy-statistics-tricks-guide

 

Higher-order organization of complex networks | Science http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6295/163

 

Sounds as if the Hands text is in the vein of the growing Big History movement, though I doubt that he uses the term to describe his work as such.

I'm about halfway through physicist Sean Carroll's new book The Big Picture: On the Origins of Life, Meaning, & the Universe Itself (Basic, May 2016 http://amzn.to/22teEyD), which is very good. So far it covers the build up of modern physics laced with more philosophy of science than most popular science books include and is an interesting read.

 

More Ph.D.s but fewer job commitments | Science | AAAS http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2016/04/more-phds-fewer-job-commitments

 

#IndieWeb Raison d'etre #55: Freedom of the press trumps atrocious comment moderation

2 min read

Last week I wrote up "Some Thoughts on Academic Publishing" after reading “Who’s downloading pirated papers? Everyone” from Science | AAAS which made some heavy rounds in social media, particularly in academic spheres. Originally I began typing my thoughts/comments into the Disqus box on their website. After getting to the third graph, I began thinking, I should be writing this on my own website as a standalone comment/piece of content and just POSSE it over to their Disqus box.

Despite the fact that the editors/moderators of one of the most venerable science journals of our day will allow internet trolls like CPO_C_Ryback and CPO_C_Rybacks_Mother to go thirty rounds on nearly every comment on their featured piece for the week, my slightly more tempered comment is still sitting in their moderation queue untouched. 

My poor pending commentary

Fortunately I had the foresight to have self-published it before hand, or the not-insignificant time I spent thinking and writing about the topic at hand would have been gone the moment I pressed send. It's one thing to get lost in the shuffle of hundreds of comments amidst trolls, it's another thing altogether to be moderated out of existence. The IndieWeb movement has prevented me from feeling like I did two decades ago after writing a term paper for hours only to lose it after discovering that I hadn't hit control-s to save what I'd written. The additional benefit was that I was able to post those same thoughts on multiple other networks effortlessly while still being able to own what I'd originally written.

The greatest irony of the whole affair is that in conjunction with the particular article I was commenting on, Marcia McNutt, Editor-in-Chief Science Journals, published a companion piece about the high costs and attention to detail and quality that journals try to maintain in their digital presence. Apparently this massive expense and terrific effort doesn't go as far as preventing internet trolls like those mentioned from running roughshod over their own site (which is "moderated" by the way) while keeping out commentary that may add to the discussion and community that they're apparently not attempting to foster.

 

 
 
 
 
 

Lots of great videos from 16w5029: Quantum Computer Science @BIRS_Math this week http://www.birs.ca/events/2016/5-day-workshops/16w5029/videos

 

Science fairs are as flawed as my solar-powered hot dog cooker https://www.statnews.com/2016/04/13/science-fairs-white-house/