Fork me on GitHub

8 Comments

  1. Posted January 17, 2008 at 09:03 | Permalink

    I actually find the whole concept of passing over the control of my identity, whether personal or scientific, to a commercial entity a bit creepy (though why I’d be happier to give it to a ‘service provider’ is a fair question). But as you say, we need proper standards built on OpenID or similar and proper data portability built on transparent standards.

  2. Posted January 17, 2008 at 10:36 | Permalink

    Great post, I couldn’t agree more. We really need an Open identifier in order to tie together contributions across multiple sites in the “scientific web”. Additionally, it will help bridge the gap between your web-contributions and your traditional peer-reviewed publications. It seems like a more formal ID system is the first step towards integrating web contributions into the scientific reward systems in a real way. We’ve batted this idea for awhile w/r/t OpenWetWare. If there was a critical mass of folks who wanted to get behind a scientific ID system built on an open, portable standard OWW could provide technical resources as well as be a non-publisher, 3rd party if that helps for the politics of the thing. We already use OpenID on the site, so it might not be a huge stretch.

  3. Posted January 17, 2008 at 11:16 | Permalink

    Jason

    Bang on. I think OWW is in a good place to champion this cause, and I’d be happy to help. One reason that I am (very slowly) starting to program again is that I feel the need to contribute to these efforts on data portability and identity. We should talk about it sometime.

    I find it somewhat incredulous that a seemingly open community (scientists) has not embraced the best platform we have (the web). Anway, more on this topic later

  4. Posted January 17, 2008 at 17:23 | Permalink

    Deepak, you’d be less incredulous if you still worked in academia :) And the key phrase is “seemingly open”, I think. Your average, work-a-day research academic is just completely unaware of these exciting developments that we assume to be common knowledge and discuss every day.

    OWW as a base for researcher IDs is an excellent idea. Count me in, I’d be happy to contribute in any way that I can.

  5. Posted January 21, 2008 at 14:04 | Permalink

    Neil’s right. The majority in academia are really clueless. I think OpenID works fairly well for asserting identity already, and it tells you where to go for more info on the person. Why would someone, given that they knew about OpenID, want some random number that depended on Megacorp’s resolver and wasn’t easily traceable back to the person when the resolver stops working?

  6. Posted March 10, 2008 at 20:30 | Permalink

    Hey Deepak,

    This is exactly why I started SciLink http://www.scilink.com. 20k users and counting. Take a look and give us some feedback. We’d love to hear from you and your readers!

  7. Posted March 24, 2008 at 13:24 | Permalink

    Hi Deepak,

    We have implimented OpenID on Connotea. We think it is a good technology to converge on for managing identity, though the uptake is probably going to be from the usual first adopters. Universities had a big hand in getting email adopted. If they lock on to OpenID in the same way, and each new student receives an OpenID then I think that could really pave the way for widespread adoption in the sciences.

    - Ian

  8. Posted March 24, 2008 at 16:24 | Permalink

    Hi Deepak,

    We have implimented OpenID on Connotea. We think it is a good technology to converge on for managing identity, though the uptake is probably going to be from the usual first adopters. Universities had a big hand in getting email adopted. If they lock on to OpenID in the same way, and each new student receives an OpenID then I think that could really pave the way for widespread adoption in the sciences.

    - Ian

2 Trackbacks

  1. [...] a site to give every researcher a unique id, received attention from Pierre, Neil, and Deepak. A recent paper on the uncertainty in aligning sequences took the interest of Blind.Scientist, [...]

  2. [...] I was finishing the survey about the service, they asked some questions about ResearcherID.com and about something that seemed to be referring to a search portal. I wouldn’t be surprised [...]

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

blog comments powered by Disqus
  • Archives

  • Disclaimer

    All opinions on this blog are my own and do not reflect those of my employers, past or present