Everybody is talking about Encyclopedia of Life these days. It is alll still very Beta – we’ll wait and see how it turns out in the end. Many are enthusiastic, some are skeptical. But, what happened to the Tree of Life? Remember it from 1995 and after? I found it useful during the last decade for teaching and finding info. Why build a whole new thing when the old one could be updated and modernized instead – it is already chockful of information.
Grab my RSS feed:
Recent Comments:
Bora Zivkovic on Morning at Triton Angie Lindsay Ma on Morning at Triton Linda chamblee on Morning at Triton Jekyll » Blog… on The Big Announcement, this tim… Mike H on The Big Announcement, this tim… -
Buy the 2009 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:
CC licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.PayPal
Sitemeter
A Blog Around The Clock 
Do scientists aspire to create great things or to become great?
With OSS the choice in many matters was to do work collectively or fork the development tree at various points. If during the initial phases the forking had not been kept to a minimum, OSS would be another failure among many models. Instead, by imposing discipline, it allowed technology (and knowledge) to get out to the common person, worldwide.
Forking still hurts the OSS although it assists the for-profit markets. But as long as global access continues to grow, OSS can move forward with reasonable results.
Sometimes those socialists get a thing or two right.