Today, exactly 20 years ago I started this blog. Two years ago I decided to upgrade my blog to one with version control. A decision I am still very excited about. It allowed me to start innovating my blog again. As part of this, and following the step Lars took ealier, I registered my blog with Rogue Scholar and I started migrating blog posts from blogger.com to my new location. I completed the years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 now.
Twenty five years ago the Chemistry Development Kit (CDK) was founded. The Chemistry and Internet (ChemInt2000) had just ended (it ran from 23 to 26 September) and my friend and I had taken the Amtrak night train from Washington to South Bend. At that time there were two leading Java applets for chemistry, JChemPaint and Jmol.
This is a bit of an administrative post and historic, but keep coming back to the question, where are all the deliverable of the (past) project. Now, since many eNanoMapper project deliverables were public, we were able to release most of them on Zenodo. This post makes an overview.
I have had the Open Letter: Stop the Uncritical Adoption of AI Technologies in Academia from June 27 open for some time now.
My old blog had (has) comments via the Blogger.com platform, but I did not have anything for the new blog. A couple of options are used, like Disqus and comments via GitHub. However, these both have the downside of a vendor lock-in and the whole point of moving my blog was to break out from such lock-ins.
The Internet Journal of Chemistry (IJC, issn:1099-8292) was one of the first scientific journals to get published on the world wide web (part of the Internet), see doi:10.1080/00987913.2000.10764578. Issues were published from 1998 to 2004. But because it predates systematic archiving of webpages by libraries, a lot is lost.
A lot is happening. If you have been following this project more closesly, you may have already seen some interesting updates, but I will post it here too. First, a quick recap. In March I started a new Blue Obelisk project to collect CCZero IUPAC names from primary literature (paper still pending). It turned out we can automate that, while legally not violating any laws or licenses.
Mike Taylor wrote up a post about the various things a journal article is doing, the first being a scientific report. We put a lot of money in establishing a scientific track record. In the past 30 years how we publish our research and how we archive it has changed significantly. If you read my blog more often, you know I have been critical of the performance of many publishers.
A recent report by the Dutch RIVM, PFAS in the blood of the Dutch population (doi:10.21945/RIVM-2025-0094), writes that seven PFAS compounds are found in blood samples of all tested people. Another nine compounds are found in at least 1-in-10 people. Because there is relevant data in the report on the 28 studied PFAS compound, I wanted to have the report more FAIR than it is on the website. Why this report?
Depending on your exact definition of doing science, keeping track as precise as possible of your observations is an essential part of doing science. The precision should be high enough that mistakes are obvious. This pattern is, of course, not limited to doing science and we see this in open source development too. Unfortunately, in the modern way of doing science, this is not getting the attention it should get.
One thing I was still missing in BioHackrXiv was a place with an overview of: 1. all biohackathons, 2. all preprints linked to a biohackathon, 3. an RSS feed for new papers of a biohackathon.