rastinza @rastinza@qoto.org

@manto No, quello era giusto uno che passava di lì, dicono sia andata così: "Ma cosa fa gendarme, non si scassinano mica così le serrature. Guarda che questi giovani non sanno più fare niente. Dia qui quell'arnese, che c'è un motivo se non mi avete mai preso."

@Yaku Attento ai diametri dei tubi che sennò in fondo non ti esce niente

@rrb I find it useful, it makes life easier.
If you work for any kind of public institution I would imagine your government knows where you are and what you do anyways.
If someone wants to track you and you don't have an orcid, they can just write your name on any publications search engine and find all you did.
To me, it just looks like making life easier to your peers looking for your works, you're not really disclosing any more information than what you already disclose yourself.
That's unless you change name in each article you publish. As far as I know you can use a pseudonym in orcid as well.

@hasmis That's nice! I used to make jars when I had a garden and a pressure cooker, now I have to rely on the shops.
Unfortunately I still haven't found a really good can of tomatoes, there are some Italian imported ones which are good, but way too expensive.

@iaintshootinmis I really like this, but I prefer it as is, not on the bread.
In Naples they call it Uova in purgatorio, slightly different but basically the same thing.
It's very nice to cook in some bell peppers as well.

I have the following problem: you can buy a lot of different brands of canned tomatoes.
Indeed I have been trying a few of them to find one I like.
However, there are a lot: very often I recognise a can, but I don't remember if I liked it or not.
This is worsened by the fact that I shop at a few different stores, each with different cans on sale.
I guess I could snap a picture of each of those, print it and place it on the fridge so that I eventually get to remember them, but this solution is not really scalable.
I can keep the pictures in my phone and go through them when I'm shopping, but I'm unsure I can put a label on the picture and I'm not really sure how I'd be able to find them.
I know it appears like a small petty problem, but it is not when you get a can that is disgusting and you have to throw away the food you cooked; to avoid this I always have to buy several cans of different types and I end up with my house filling up with the ones I don't like.

Damn you!
#kitchen #tomato #shopping

@ndocist @fr Try looking at it here https://mastodon.top/@fr/109693412450660672

Ok, you convinced me... I guess I'll take a look at your paper.

@fr @ndocist If you're talking about literature and philology, as well as some fields of history, I do agree that using the local language is advantageous, but that is already being done.

I guess you're talking about things of considerable political and social importance, but the fact that these areas of research are important doesn't make them any less technical.
Then there are some simple experiments whose methodology and results can be easily understood, especially in fields like psychology and economics, but that doesn't make the whole field simple.

These are my assumptions, I don't think it is a good idea in any of these cases.
Especially treating scientific research differently according to the political importance it supposedly could have. This would feel quite dangerous to me actually. If you need to explain something to the public, you have scientific journalists who do just that.
I guess fields of extreme interest at the moment could be: energy production sectors, food production, climate change, prime material crisis, medicine development, migratory demographics. You tell me how these subjects aren't highly technical and complex, probably much more than a paper on a specific chemical process.

@sladner @rhgrouls @qui_oui @erinnacland Damn, I guess... Does Mendeley generate a lot of duplicate records?
Where do those come from, is it the transition process?

@fr @ndocist What are you talking about when you suggest that scientific publications should not necessarily be in English then?
What research fields are you referring to and what's the parameter you use to distinguish them from the others?

@fr @ndocist Scholar communications are thought for experts. People who are not experts in the field might misunderstand them or fail to see the bigger picture.
I'm not saying it should be forbidden to the common people to read the articles, that is in fact useful; but an expert explaining the findings is not just added value, it's almost necessary to understand the findings themselves.
That, unless you suggest everyone should become an expert on any topic discussed.

As an example: say they discover a new method to produce ammonia, which is cheaper than the Haber-Bosh process.
I wouldn't suggest people to read articles about that, but rather an expert to explain what it is and why it's important.
That's because to understand the importance of an improvement over the Haber-Bosh process one would first have to read such article, which would be a highly technical physics and chemistry paper, this paper would probably use methodologies developed in other papers, thus to fully understand it you'd have to read some other 10-20 articles, then get informed about the amount of ammonia produced in the world, understand how this ammonia is used, estimate what would be the price to produce the ammonia and how big is the improvement etc. etc.

This is possible, but it is unrealistic to expect everyone to do it. A much better alternative, in my opinion, is having an expert explain all these things; and then if you're interested take a look at the paper to see how this new method works.

@fr @ndocist I don't believe the language to be the major problem to solve in the communication between scholars, citizens and decision makers.
Generally citizens and decision makers listen to scientists from their country, which will translate the scientific consensus into their language. This is a good way regarding how the information is provided, much better in my opinion than decision makers and citizens reading the articles themselves; which is what you seem to be implicitly suggesting.
Might help a little bit, I'm unsure this little improvement is worth the effort.

@fresseng @erinnacland @MatteoCarandini @academicchatter Indeed, but it's still unclear how it would work on a large scale and how it would substitute commercial publishers.
The fact that it has been theorized and applied in some occasions still doesn't make it an alternative.
Sci-Hub is currently an alternative to commercial publishers.

Openscience is hopefully what's going to substitute this system, but the path to reach that is unclear.

@mattjhodgkinson @erinnacland @MatteoCarandini @academicchatter Indeed the second one is what I meant.

@fr @ndocist How will this make scholarly work better?