Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 07:48:11 +0530 From: Subbiah Arunachalam Here is a news story from Peter Suber's blog on open source science (scientists in far off places collaborating using open source software). The Internet and the web provide new opportunities and we must take advantage of them. Arun ------ More on open-source science Sarah Everts, Open-Source Science, Chemical & Engineering News, July 24, 2006. Excerpt: Scientists from Sydney to San Francisco have created an online research collaboration to develop cures for tropical diseases, using the "open source" programming model that produced freeware like Linux and Firefox, the award-winning Web browser. The motivation is straightforward: Tropical diseases are low priority for big pharma because the return on drug development is so small. Patients in developing nations just don't have the financial ability to pay for patented drugs. The structure is radical: Online discussions will prioritize a list of experiments that anyone can take on. Raw data will be posted online and discussed. Members of the consortium will solicit further ideas and expertise, hoping the greater research community steps up to the plate. The group, which operates under an umbrella website called Synaptic Leap [blogged here 6/3/06], hopes that volunteered time, computer power, and reagents will eventually result in a portfolio of drug leads that will be made freely available for development. Currently, members of Synaptic Leap are describing projects online and asking others for help and advice. Participants in open-source collaborations give up their ability to patent discoveries by definition, because their data are public as soon as they are posted. But some argue that when it comes to neglected diseases, there's nothing to lose, because there was never any income to gain.... If the group publishes raw data online in the pursuit of virtuous science, does this negate the ability to publish in a peer-reviewed journal? Will scientists put their raw data, and possibly their reputations, online? These and other issues were raised by University of Sydney chemist Matthew H. Todd and his Synaptic Leap colleagues in a recent essay entitled "Open-Source Research - The Power of Us" (Aust. J. Chem. 2006, 59, 291).... When it comes to the issue of publishing, [Jean-Claude] Bradley [who blogs his research data] argues that open-source discussions are similar to conferences, where people openly discuss unpublished research and do not fear being denied the right to publish in a journal, assuming the science is good. Todd says the biggest misconception is that proponents of open source are antagonists of peer review. "I think the value of peer review is clear, and I would want to publish whatever work came out of the open-source research. The question is whether the journals will allow it."