29
edits
Talk:Social Systems: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
* Questions about adoption | * Questions about adoption | ||
* Regulations (for example, in USA there's data open or they don't receive money anymore), in EU there's a proposal to evaluate researchers using diff metrics, such as openness | * Regulations (for example, in USA there's data open or they don't receive money anymore), in EU there's a proposal to evaluate researchers using diff metrics, such as openness | ||
Sílvia | Sílvia | ||
* old incentives, what are the ones in place besides reputation? | |||
* What should we keep in mind when creating | |||
Angelina | Angelina | ||
| Line 23: | Line 22: | ||
* Most of the incentives are monetary (there are social) | |||
* | * researchers are not in a position to decide; they're put in the system | ||
* funders can probably change the infrastructure and regulations | |||
Q: stakeholders? | |||
* Researchers | |||
* grant funders | |||
* publishing agencies | |||
* Other: industry, taxpayers | |||
Q - change comeing from which stakeholders? | |||
* Biggest US and European | |||
* smaller foundations, not supper novel ideas, a lot of outliers in Web3 | |||
* researcher will move to web3 in 10 to 20 | |||
* Stepwise approach, led by biggest funder | |||
*alternative view*: demonstrate the reality of sth, Web3 and Desci - opportunity to demonstrate structures and mechanisms working in a small scale, and showcasing to onboard larger organizations | |||
* start small and demonstrate value | |||
* | |||
**incentive mechanisms for contributing and maintaining living lit reviews in both domains**. | **incentive mechanisms for contributing and maintaining living lit reviews in both domains**. | ||