Richard Northover's Avatar

Richard Northover

@richard.northover.info

Adjective verber of nouns. Thoughts here are my own.

45 Followers  |  338 Following  |  36 Posts  |  Joined: 18.11.2024  |  2.2435

Latest posts by richard.northover.info on Bluesky

Route::get('/{subject}/{predicate}/{object}', [SpanController::class, 'showConnection'])->name('spans.connection');

09.07.2025 10:23 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

As a <subject>
I want to <predicate>
So that I can <predicate> <object>
πŸ™ŒπŸ»

26.06.2025 07:02 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Party like it’s 1999 πŸŽ‰

26.06.2025 06:51 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Are you in a timewarp?

26.06.2025 06:43 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Story this morning about one part of the data bill being blocked, and this meaning that other parts are *also* blocked, chimes with this idea. Make small commits, not massive releases…

05.06.2025 08:12 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Well, I try not to β€œinhabit” it. I’m listening to you because I’m interested and open to learning. Don’t assume I agree with all the things you disagree with. As I say, thanks for the exchange, it’s been really interesting and powerful.

04.06.2025 17:57 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Agree πŸ‘πŸ»

04.06.2025 17:52 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Good point. I like the idea of moving away from β€œpapers” and towards β€œunits of information” that can be examined and replicated. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It’s an evolutionary process.

04.06.2025 17:35 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Not *just* identity though… I’m not saying that you can trust something because of who said it… but it’s harder to trust something when you don’t have a way to connect the dots and filter out deliberate deception.

04.06.2025 16:19 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

I get it, really. I think we’re talking about slightly different things here, hard to tease out in a thread. I think you should be judged on your ideas not your label… but I think there’s probably something about the *reputation over time* of your pseudonym. What if you had dozens of impersonators?

04.06.2025 15:56 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

We agree. Nullius in verba. I’m *not* talking about believing someone’s claims because of their authority. I’m talking about honest signalling, and how to maintain trust in a world where people try to deliberately manipulate, which is a problem (and an even more serious one, arguably, with AI etc.)

04.06.2025 15:49 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

I was thinking "institution", yes. But it's far from simple, I agree. Humans haven't worked this out yet, which is why I think it's interesting. Genuine question: what's your solution, if you have one? What should I read to understand your thinking?

04.06.2025 13:01 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

They’re not ALL unreliable, no. Some of them could be. That’s a difficult thing to balance. I’m not arguing against properly blind peer review, or anything like that… I’m thinking about trustable signals where they’re helpful to everyone involved (and not where they’re not). Good to debate this…

04.06.2025 12:35 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

I’m thinking more about β€œaccountability to other things that themselves can be held accountable” - *not* β€œauthority”. That would go against the whole idea of science…

04.06.2025 12:25 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Meanwhile, mandatory sign in if you want to watch or listen. Progress.

04.06.2025 11:27 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Ah, nostalgia

04.06.2025 10:16 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Trust and accountability feedback loops help make science more robust against fraud, and more practical. With unlimited time and resources, yes, it makes sense to judge *everything* on the content alone. Do you know anyone with unlimited time and resources? I see where you’re coming from, though.

03.06.2025 23:05 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

OK: point taken. But what would happen if you randomised your pseudonym every time, and if everyone everywhere did the same? Not just at peer review but always? I agree it would be philosophically right to check *all* aspects of everything from first principles every time, but it has its drawbacks.

03.06.2025 22:48 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

…how do we get β€œgood” and β€œbad” stuff defined? Is this just that there are different β€œidealised end states”? I mean, is this less about leaders and more about… disagreement? (Speaking as someone who tends to agree with you…)

03.06.2025 22:24 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Had fun talking at an @orcid.org event today. This is my new favourite slide πŸ™‚

03.06.2025 18:02 β€” πŸ‘ 7    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

British? β˜”οΈ

21.05.2025 06:41 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Title:
SOME GRAMMATICAL VOICES FOR USE IN SCIENTIFIC WRITING

ACTIVE VOICE
e.g.
Our team collected samples and then we tested them.

CLICKBAIT VOICE
e.g.
We collected some samples...
You won't believe what happened next!

PASSIVE VOICE
e.g.
Samples were collected and tested.

HAIKU VOICE
e.g.
Quiet science lab.
Workers arrive with samples.
The testing begins.

PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE VOICE
e.g. We did all the collecting and testing.
No need to thank us.
Just doing our job.

CONSPIRACY VOICE
e.g.
Mysterious "Samples" were harvested and covertly "tested" by so-called scientists.

Title: SOME GRAMMATICAL VOICES FOR USE IN SCIENTIFIC WRITING ACTIVE VOICE e.g. Our team collected samples and then we tested them. CLICKBAIT VOICE e.g. We collected some samples... You won't believe what happened next! PASSIVE VOICE e.g. Samples were collected and tested. HAIKU VOICE e.g. Quiet science lab. Workers arrive with samples. The testing begins. PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE VOICE e.g. We did all the collecting and testing. No need to thank us. Just doing our job. CONSPIRACY VOICE e.g. Mysterious "Samples" were harvested and covertly "tested" by so-called scientists.

My latest @newscientist.com cartoon

28.04.2025 10:09 β€” πŸ‘ 5070    πŸ” 1946    πŸ’¬ 72    πŸ“Œ 100

Yep. The fact that you *have* to sign in to use it or Sounds reveals that it’s about user data collection, not information education or entertainment.

01.04.2025 11:43 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Him takes my taxi
Him helps me with my English
Him tells me it’s β€œhe”
#haiku #uber #procrastinating

19.03.2025 11:02 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
Food scientist impersonated as an editor and reviewer in Frontiers articles Frontiers has issued a retraction and multiple corrections for papers in several of its journals after the publisher discovered a reviewer had been impersonated. Alla El-Din Bekhit is listed as the…

"I was very angry about how easily people’s identities can be misused."

14.03.2025 16:32 β€” πŸ‘ 14    πŸ” 4    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 1
Trusted Identity in Academic Publishing | Part 2: The Researcher Identity Verification Framework - STM Association Building on earlier work, this draft report proposes a Researcher Identity Trust Framework to strengthen trust in academic publishing. It outlines practical, proportionate ways to verify researcher id...

Next week is now! stm-assoc.org/document/tru...

13.03.2025 14:13 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Something I've been working on πŸ‘¨β€πŸ’»πŸ™‚ I'd love to hear your thoughts... πŸ€” #researchintegrity #RIVER

13.03.2025 14:11 β€” πŸ‘ 3    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

I'd be interested to hear what you make of the next report, which has some recommendations...

08.03.2025 12:14 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

I actually think I will

08.03.2025 12:06 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Um... *link*? ;-)

08.03.2025 11:50 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

@richard.northover.info is following 20 prominent accounts