Category: 1.1 Research (General)
-
Upcoming talk: Open source in university projects (in German)
I’ll be giving a talk on open source strategies for university projects: How to set-up student projects for start-ups and how to organize research projects using open source for the common good. The talk is in German and will be held at the Johannes Kepler Universität (of Linz, Austria). The talk will take place on…
-
More hilarious-obnoxious academic spam
It has been bad for quite a while, but this one is beyond ridiculous. Not a request to submit a paper but a request for a review, on a topic that I have no idea about. Straight from the email: Dear Dr. Dirk Riehle, We will be most grateful if you could create time to…
-
How to recognize an academic spam publisher
I think this is self-evident to the human reader. From an email I got: Your interesting published article “Erratum to: The single-vendor commercial open source business model” drives me to call for new papers and honorary reviewer, on behalf of Computer Communication & Collaboration, which is an English quarterly journal in Canada. Oh well… And…
-
The one publisher to boycott @ReedElsevierHQ
If there is one for-profit publisher to boycott, it is Elsevier. Here is the proof. My university, the Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, just published a list of the most expensive journals it is subscribed to. 19 out of 20 are Elsevier journals (page in German). My university’s library is in a negotiation stale-mate with Elsevier, which is…
-
Publishers, e-books, and DRM
2012-02-18: Updated the post with translations from the original letter. I’m an Addison-Wesley author and just received a letter from Pearson, the owner of Addison-Wesley, informing me about their thoughts and steps towards e-books and the digital age. The letter is written as an open letter with no apparent secrets, so I’m making it available…
-
Do engineering researchers care about truth?
So ICSE, the top software engineering conference, rejected our paper, again. The reviewers were actually quite positive: high-quality work, little or no flaws, interesting. One of the reviewers found the paper’s results surprising, asked for more details, and suggested new research directions. The final conclusion of both reviews, however, was the same: The work has…