Generative AI (genAI) is now ubiquitous in research. The field of academic publishing is struggling with an overwhelming mass of genAI slop and where to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable genAI use. GenAI not only offers new opportunities, as is widely touted, but also creates numerous new problems and challenges, not least for responsible research. What does it mean to use genAI responsibly? Is it even possible?

Die gesellschaftspolitische Debatte über Flucht und Migration ist von einem Versicherheitlichungsdiskurs geprägt, der Zuwanderung als Sicherheitsrisiko konstruiert, restriktive Maßnahmen zum Schutz der nationalen Sicherheit begünstigt und dabei häufig neue Unsicherheiten für Geflüchtete erzeugt.

This is a long post. It started focused on ultrafaint dwarfs, but can’t avoid more general issues. In order to diagnose non-equilibrium effects, we have to have some expectation for what equilibrium would be. The Tully-Fisher relation is a useful empirical touchstone for that. How the Tully-Fisher relation comes about is itself theory-dependent.

von Rieke Paetsch-Saleh „Was machen wir eigentlich mit Holly?“ – „Wir könnten ihn doch einfach verleihen!“ Holly, das ist der inoffizielle Name eines faltbaren Bollerwagens, der seit 2020 als ungeliebtes Büro-Accessoire sein Dasein in der Lebendigen Bibliothek Bottrop fristet.

Open Science (OS) is a movement that aims to bring about a change to the academic publishing system. Yet, despite being around for over 30 years, it has had relatively limited success. Traditional publishers still dominate the landscape, article processing charges have made publishing less equitable and the whole system is straining under the pressure of increased numbers of papers and a reduced reviewer pool.

Artificial intelligence is forcing a reckoning not just in our schools, but in how we solve the world’s most complex problems.  When ChatGPT exploded into public consciousness, the immediate fear that rippled through our institutions was singular: the corruption of process.

Our own dev guide states Recognizing the diverse forms of contributions to our mission is very important to us:we like thanking package reviewers and more generally all package contributors, organizations as well as individuals. We have recently extended our efforts to acknowledging the different roles there are when publishing a blog post.

Nuestra propia guía de desarrollo dice Reconocer las diversas formas de contribuciones a nuestra misión es muy importante para rOpenSci:nos gusta dar las gracias a quienes revisan paquetes y en general a todas las personas y organizaciones que contribuyen a los paquetes. Recientemente hemos ampliado nuestros esfuerzos para reconocer las diferentes funciones que existen al publicar un artículo en nuestro blog.

Notre propre guide de développement souligne Reconnaître les diverses formes de contributions à notre mission est très importante pour nous :nous aimons remercier les personnes qui font la révision de paquets et plus généralement tous les contributeur·rice·s aux paquets, les organisations ainsi que les individus. Nous avons récemment étendu nos efforts à la reconnaissance des différents rôles permettant la publication d’un article de blog.

We want to introduce a new, work-in-progress book on spatial data visualization in R using the tmap package. The current version of the book, titled Spatial Data Visualization with tmap: A Practical Guide to Thematic Mapping in R , is available online at https://tmap.geocompx.org/. This blog post provides an overview of the book, its current status, and how you can get involved in its development.

A few days ago I got a sensationally stupid email from one of those websites that most of us probably have a subscription to, but which I will not give the oxygen of publicity by linking to[1]. The subject line was: Your paper “NEURAL SPINE BIFURCATION…” is now an analogy. No; no, it’s not.