Open Science: Difference between revisions

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "<html><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DnWocYKqvhw" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe></html>")
 
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<html><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DnWocYKqvhw" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe></html>
<html><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DnWocYKqvhw" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe></html>
=See Also=
*[https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Construction_Sets#Lab_Stuff The "Lab Stuff" Subsection  of the "Construction Sets" Page]
*[[Open-Source Lab]]
=In Academia=
In academia, for example, PhD theses are not published. They can be. [https://www.academia.edu/43006279/From_Open_Access_to_Open_Science_The_Path_From_Scientific_Reality_to_Open_Scientific_Communication]. Remarkably, or 1100 surveyed - 20% think that peer review is not important. One would think that review would be generally accepted as good.
=Useful Links=
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratory Wikipedia Page on Laboratories]
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do-it-yourself_biology Wikipedia Page on DIY Bio]

Latest revision as of 15:31, 11 May 2020

See Also

In Academia

In academia, for example, PhD theses are not published. They can be. [1]. Remarkably, or 1100 surveyed - 20% think that peer review is not important. One would think that review would be generally accepted as good.

Useful Links