![\"\"](\"https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/4.png\")
As we recently wrote, there is really no agreed-upon definition of what a preprint is. And even if we could agree, it would not settle the question of what constitutes a preprint server. As we have been looking to study preprints and their role in scholarly communications, we have been looking to generate a directory of servers that, even if flawed or limited, can give us a common starting point for examining preprints and the culture around them.\u00a0
\nUnsurprisingly, we are not alone in this. ASAPbio, an organization dedicated to promoting the use of preprints, is looking to update their directory of preprints. We shared some of our insights with them, and thought some of our feedback might also be more useful to the broader community.\u00a0
\nMost importantly, any directory will need to operationalize their definition of what constitutes a preprint server.\u00a0
\nOur own attempts at constructing a list of preprint servers indicates a wide range of platforms and publishers allow authors to post preprints, but whether these should be called \"preprint servers\" is far from settled. Researchers can post preprints to venues dedicated exclusively to preprints; publish/review/curate platforms; journal-based platforms that publish both preprints and peer-reviewed articles; general repositories that accept preprints among other types of research outputs; and the list goes on.\u00a0
\nWhile there may not be a single or right answer to \"what is a preprint server,\" a directory cannot function as a meaningful community resource without\u00a0 a clear operational definition. Its creators must explain what is included, what is excluded, and why.
\nA useful directory needs more than just a list of venues and services\u2014it requires descriptive information that lets users filter and understand the landscape. The challenge lies in how one captures that information. When assessing whether a server has a particular policy, a simple “yes\" or \"no\" indicating whether a policy is “clear” tells only part of the story. A policy can be clear without being specific, and policies that appear similarly clear can differ substantially in their actual terms.
\nIn our own analysis, we encountered exactly this problem. Instead of forcing policies into binary categories, directories should specify which characteristics matter for each policy area, then document those details explicitly. For example, rather than simply recording whether a server has a withdrawal policy, a directory should indicate who can request a withdrawal, under what circumstances, and how the withdrawal is reflected in the scholarly record. Leave fields blank where no clear policy exists\u2014but do the work of showing what the policy actually says.
\nBuilding a useful directory of preprint servers is more complex than it might initially seem. It requires not just listing which servers exist, but making deliberate choices about which definitions to use and then describing policies with enough nuance that researchers and other stakeholders can actually make informed decisions. Without this intentionality\u2014both in definition and in detail\u2014directories risk becoming incomplete or misleading resources. The good news is that the current moment offers an opportunity to get this right.
\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.59350/zqh03-rx293
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/zqh03-rx293","guid":"https://www.scholcommlab.ca/?p=6277","image":"https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/4.png","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789516800,"rid":"ysgyz-n4s56","summary":"As we recently wrote, there is really no agreed-upon definition of what a preprint is. And even if we could [\u2026]","tags":["Research","Preprints"],"title":"Advice for a Preprint Services Directory","updated_at":1789797827,"url":"https://www.scholcommlab.ca/2026/09/16/advice-for-a-preprint-services-directory/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/03wc8by49","name":"Posit Software, PBC (United States)"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Clawson","given":"James","url":"https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6756-0607"},{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Kaczmarek","given":"Ursula"},{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/019jywm96","name":"rOpenSci"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Ross","given":"Noam","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2136-0000"},{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Delaney","given":"Scott","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0813-018X"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"3446712e-ab03-4bb7-8641-571dcda8d8cd","created":1787702400,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Tracking disruptions to U.S. federal science funding, grant by grant.","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/grantwitness","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/3446712e-ab03-4bb7-8641-571dcda8d8cd/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://grantwitness.org/updates/rogue-scholar.xml","filter":null,"generator":"Other","home_page_url":"https://grantwitness.org/updates?type=updates","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"grantwitness","status":"active","subfield":"3321","title":"Grant Witness","updated":1789516800,"use_api":null},"blog_name":"Grant Witness","blog_slug":"grantwitness","content_html":"Together with our partner States United Democracy Center, Grant Witness today launched Lost Funds, an interactive tracker that provides a holistic look at federal grants that have been canceled, frozen, delayed, or otherwise interrupted since Trump took office in January 2025. The tool documents $177 billion in federal funding disruptions across all 50 states and Washington D.C., spanning 17 policy sectors, and examines impacts in communities across the country.
\n\"By bringing thousands of funding disruptions from the Trump administration together in one, centralized website, the Lost Funds Tracker puts the magnitude of their impact on full display,\" said Scott Delaney, Co-Founder of Grant Witness. \"The impact of funding cuts at this scale cannot be overstated. These disruptions touch everything from health care and disaster relief to technology and agriculture. The data tells a story about the consequences communities face as a result of the cuts, and the resources they're fighting relentlessly to preserve.\"
\n\"Many states have been fighting the impacts of federal funding disruptions one grant at a time ever since Trump took office,\" said Kelly Rader, Research Director at the States United Democracy Center. \"This is funding for states that has already been approved by Congress. But the Trump administration is trying to take unliteral action to stop that money from reaching the communities it's meant for. Lost Funds illustrates just how widespread these funding cuts are, the scale of the harm they've caused, and how states are once again on the front lines protecting their residents.\"
\nLost Funds provides a comprehensive overview of funding disruptions from the past 20 months, covering the Trump administration's attempt to freeze funding during his first week in office and each subsequent disruption across health care, education, transportation, disaster relief, science and technology, and more. It includes an overview of state efforts to challenge the disruptions and the funding they've restored for their communities.
\nKey takeaways from the Lost Funds national landscape:
\nExplore the national picture and drill down by state, program, sector, and grant recipient here.
\nThe Lost Funds Tracker will be updated regularly as the Trump administration takes new actions to disrupt funding, state lawsuits move through the courts, and stories of consequences in communities are told.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/y27rm-4dq03","guid":"https://doi.org/10.59350/y27rm-4dq03","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789516800,"rid":"126yg-ben14","summary":"Together with our partner States United Democracy Center, Grant Witness today launched Lost Funds, an interactive tracker that provides a holistic look at federal grants that have been canceled, frozen, delayed, or otherwise interrupted since Trump took office in January 2025.","title":"Tracking $177 Billion in Disrupted Federal Grants with the Lost Funds Project","updated_at":1789797806,"url":"https://grantwitness.org/updates/tracking-177-billion-in-disrupted-federal-grants-with-the-lost-funds-project","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"name":"Open Humans Foundation"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Greshake Tzovaras","given":"Bastian","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9925-9623"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"c1baf1e7-80ce-43eb-bc1c-a978dd7d62c9","created":1712793600,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Bastian Greshake Tzovaras is an open/citizen science activist and researcher with a background in biology and bioinformatics. He worked as a senior researcher at The Alan Turing Institute and Inserm. In 2011, he founded openSNP. He was awarded a PhD","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/tzovar","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/c1baf1e7-80ce-43eb-bc1c-a978dd7d62c9/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://tzovar.as/feed.xml","filter":null,"generator":"Jekyll","home_page_url":"https://tzovar.as/","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"tzovar","status":"active","subfield":"3305","title":"Bastian Greshake Tzovaras |","updated":1789562700,"use_api":null},"blog_name":"Bastian Greshake Tzovaras |","blog_slug":"tzovar","content_html":"\nHow we politicize technology in service of a better world is an open and contested question.\nA few days ago I shared a piece on historicising enshittification. \nIn it, Arvind L. U. explores the limits of how Doctorow's framing around that term is both ahistorical, in that it limits itself to a view that ignores the realities of the global south, and lacking imagination for not even considering a real alternative political economy of the internet.\nIn response, Henrik shared a quote out of Digital Solidarity \u2013 a new book by Aline Blankertz and Malte Engeler \u2013 which similarly considers the enshittification framing to conceal the fact that it's the pinnacle of capitalism and not an aberration.
\nIntrigued by this, I really wanted to read the whole, longer argument that Aline & Malte are making in their book.\nLuckily, I managed to score a review copy of it, which I went through over the weekend.\nAs the book is unfortunately right now only available in German, I thought I'd at least attempt to give a small review and summary of why I'm glad I read it.
\nStructurally, the book is divided into two parts:\nThe first half analyses the status quo of capitalist digitization.\nHow does the spread of digital technologies help legitimize and drive capitalism and authoritarian structures? \nThe second half then dives into their counter proposal of digital solidarity and how digital technologies could be used in an emancipatory way.\nJointly, both halves explore which technologies can be appropriated for progressive causes (and how), and which ones are irredeemable.
\nThe first half of the book starts off very strong.\nIt outlines well how society has \u2013 at least in parts intentionally \u2013 been shaped to a certain level of apathy about the future, in which societal progress for many has been reduced to the production cycles of new devices and software.\nAnd in which collective imaginaries make the existing capitalist appear natural, where people might consider rejecting discrimination based on race, but not overcoming class society.
\nLaunching from this, the book also provides a great exploration of how & why much of contemporary tech critique is failing by not focusing on the underlying capitalist structures that work as expected.\nWhether that's Zuboffs surveillance capitalism that appeals to the managerial class to please implement ethical business practices, technofeudalism or the above mentioned enshittification by Doctorow, which proposes the solution in enforcing more market competition and regulation.\nThey all locate the solution to existing problems with technology by making minor tweaks to the dominant economic dynamics, which not only do not question the reign of capitalism overall but risk reinforcing it.
\nThe meat of the critical analysis that follows consists of countering three of the big myths that surround digital technologies and the internet. Namely, that digitization is progress, that the internet democratizes and that open source can offer a counter to capitalist logics. \nOn the first point, Aline and Malte do a great job of exploring how the myth of digitally mediated progress takes the shape of a cyber-libertarianism that rejects the collective in favor of the individual, their responsibility and market forces.\nThis includes how the common ideas that degoogling, self-hosting, and a focus on privacy can end up not being emancipatory praxis, but libertarian isolation that in turn promotes technologies like cryptocurrencies and culminates in fascist ideals.
\nThese tendencies are tied neatly into the review of the democratizing potential of digital technology, which draws from the same cyber-libertarian framing\u2014and has mostly led to a concentration of power. \nPlatforms like Spotify, Airbnb, Uber etc. by no means have driven democratization, but have helped concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the platforms.\nAnalogous to how the push for generative 'AI' is working towards ensuring that creative activities will have to rely on renting AI-assistance.
\nI particularly enjoyed the last myth, on open source as counter culture, as it hits very close to home.\nFraming open source as the electric car of digital politics is in equal parts hilarious and fitting \u2013 especially in the context of German car culture:\nJust as the electric car is a step up over the internal combustion engine but doesn't challenge the car-centrism, open source software (OSS) has benefits over proprietary software but doesn't very little if anything to challenge the extractive nature of big technology corporations, which themselves profit tremendously from OSS.1
\nSuch extractivism is a tendency that is now even indirectly promoted through companies and civil society organisations alike2, by using labels such as digital public goods or digital public infrastructures, which contribute to concealing the ways in which the value from unpaid volunteer labor flows into corporations all while enshrining the offering of digital services as a task for society.\nAlong those lines, much of OSS also at least implicitly reproduces the dominant thinking and technological affordances of big technology companies and thus giving credence to them.
\nBut an emancipatory alternative to e.g. corporate-controlled social media needs to be more than just Twitter but open source.\nWhich OSS often falls short of, thanks to top-down control structures which are most often under the hegemony of an homogeneous (white, cis, male) elite.
\nAs already briefly mentioned above, the way that privacy is also used as a common concept by cyber-libertarians who focus on the creation of a hyper-individualist is getting some well deserved attention as well.\nThe EU's GDPR privacy regulations are equally the focus of a critical discussion, highlighting the explicitly colonial aspects of the regulation (by having a global ambition of forcing the rest of the world to adapt those rules as well) as well as the capitalist logic it operates in (by reinforcing that profit motives decide when & how personal data is used).
\nAnd lastly, there is of course the tight coupling between the technologies pushed by technology corporations and their relationship to authoritarianism, the military industrial complex, and eugenics, etc\u2026\nAll while society glorifies tech managers for bringing salvation progress, helping foster fascist praise for strong leaders.3
After all that critical analysis, the change of pace to envisioning a positive alternative was more than welcome.\nAnd Malte & Aline contrast their vision of digital solidarity very nicely with the currently trendy digital sovereignty.\nFaced with the political and economic violence touted by the United States, the European Union and many of their member states are touting the latter as an alternative.4\nWhile it might sound catchy, it generally falls squarely into the same nationalistic tropes of just needing an EU-based competitor to US big-tech instead of actively bringing about change.5
\nIn contrast, digital solidarity touches on the emancipation of the people using technology.\nHighlighting the original demands of the luddites \u2013 wanting a say in which technology is used and how \u2013 it explores how the digital could be different.\nOne bit I found particularly interesting was the framework by Andrea Vetter, which I didn't know before. Building on Illich's Tools for Conviviality, her work outlines 5 dimensions to assess technologies for their conviviality: Their impact on (human) connections, their accessibility, their interactions with the living world and their appropriateness in terms of resource input and output.
\nBased on their own luddite-informed model, and taking Vetter into account, Aline and Malte build their own criteria for an emancipatory technology critique:
\nBased on these three criteria, they outline nicely why 'AI' can not be used by the left as an emancipatory tool, for failing on all three counts:\nBy its very nature, it's a technology that does not harmonize abilities but concentrates power in the hands of the few, due to the requirements for large amounts of capital and training data, its inherent force for removing individual agency that removes collective action and the biases encoded in all training data.\nIt also is explicitly a technology that is created and marketed as \"all-purpose\", failing the question of excluding unwanted uses.\nAnd with respect to its appropriateness, the ecological, economical and societal damages have been documented extensively, for example due to resource use (water, fossil fuels, rare earth minerals mined in the global south\u2026) for 'AI' data centers.
\nIn the following chapters, the book goes on to outline a more positive view of how digital solidarity can form a counter model to the predominant discourses that suck up a lot of oxygen, without offering transformative options.\nActs of resistance, individual ones such as algorithmic sabotage, robot vandalism against (allegedly) self-driving cars, or the hacking of nazi dating platforms or collective ones such as group efforts against data centers can be one tool.\nAnd so can positive interventions such as repair-cafes, if they are sufficiently politicized to move beyond just the individual benefit.
\nThe bigger step and challenge proposed is about the ownership of the digital platforms.\nIn their current configurations, the harms created by them are a direct consequence of the extractivist profit logics they operate under:\nReal estate platforms deploy data science methods to help landlords to extract the maximum possible rents (and thus also maximize their own income).\nAnd the same applies to digital streaming services, and basic digital infrastructures like data centers in the hands of corporations.
\nUltimately, the book makes a convincing argument how shifting the control from private ownership into the collective would allow designing technologies that benefit everyone instead.\nWithout falling prey to tinkering on the margins by asking for interoperability, open source/data, it centers on envisioning technology that serves the public benefit and breaks with the capitalist logics.\nBuilding on Graeber & Wengrow, it shows how democratic control of the digital \u2013 that includes the freedom to leave, no obey and to build new social systems \u2013 can offer an alternative to the existing tech authoritarianism.
\nJointly, Aline & Malte make a great contribution to envision fights for digital technologies \u2013 and societies \u2013 that are anti-authoritarian, post-capitalist, and emancipatory.\nIf you read German, Digital Solidarity makes a great read to sharpen your thinking about how to approach the critique of digital technologies and gives a lot of food for thought on how to approach your own activism to overcome the status quo.\nAnd if you don't read German, my hope is that some of you are now at least curious about the concept.\nMaybe even enough to ask your favorite lefty publisher for suggesting putting out a translated version? ;-)
\nThere is also a good bit about the Open Source Initiative's open-washing of 'AI' through their misguided definition of 'open source AI', which explicitly does not require opening up training data and thus is mostly a push to legitimize these corporations' open-washing by giving an official label.\u00a0\u21a9
\nI'm glad to see more people critically evaluating civil society associations and other NGOs for their role in legitimizing existing power structures in their continuous quest for funding of full-time positions.\u00a0\u21a9
\nAs the book outlines, fascists profiting and putting technology into their service is not new, as IBM and the Holocaust demonstrates so well.\u00a0\u21a9
\nAlso here the role of civil society actors is highlighted for good reason: In their quest for funding and influence, many of them are uncritically jumping on that bandwagon as well.\u00a0\u21a9
\nAs an aside: The director general of the French National Institute for Geography tried to reframe sovereignty in an imho interesting way during his closing remarks of the State of the Map conference: The lesson from the commons is that sovereignty is not only about control. Sovereignty is not about closing doors, closing frontiers. You can also build sovereignty thanks to openness, [\u2026] thanks to cooperation. Thanks Marcos, for the transcription.\u00a0\u21a9
\n[From Arfon]
\nEarlier this year I announced that I was stepping down as Editor-in-Chief of JOSS after ten years in the role, and we put out a call for a new EiC. Today I'm delighted to announce that Daniel S. Katz is taking over as Editor-in-Chief, effective 18 September 2026.
\nDan was one of the people who helped shape JOSS before it even existed. He was part of the small group who helped refine what JOSS should be (and shouldn't be) in the months before we launched in May 2016. He went on to become one of our most active Associate Editors-in-Chief, and has been deeply involved in every significant editorial decision the journal has made over the past decade. I can't think of anyone better placed to lead JOSS into its next chapter.
\nDan and I will be working together over the coming weeks to transition EiC responsibilities.
\n[From Dan]
\nWhen Arfon first told me he was thinking of stepping down, back in 2019 while we were at Murrayfield Rugby Stadium (for a conference of course), I wondered if and how JOSS would survive. Fortunately, in the seven years since then, JOSS continued to thrive and grow, overcoming obstacles like the initial Covid period and then the increased impact of generative AI.
\nBy the time Arfon started talking about stepping down again last year, I had become confident that the JOSS community of associate-editors-in-chief (AEiCs) and editors would be able to keep the journal going. So when I applied to be EiC, I had a mix of feelings that included satisfaction about what we have done so far, confidence about the future and that our community could handle it, and some remaining fear about what I didn't know and wouldn't find out until I started.
\nNow, on the cusp of this transition, I'm really looking forward to working with the full JOSS community, including AEiCs and editors who have ideas about how we can improve the journal and its processes, other community members who continue to submit software and papers and to review them, and of course, Arfon, who we will continue to rely on as both the past/founding EiC and the continuing JOSS tech lead.
\nJOSS, as a developer-friendly diamond open access journal for research software packages that itself runs like an open source project and is a member of the open source community, isn't changing, and we'll continue to work collectively to improve research software and its recognition, and to provide scholarly credit for its developers and maintainers. Please join us by submitting or volunteering to review, and keep an eye out for other opportunities to contribute.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59349/pzaq7-0aq48","guid":"https://blog.joss.theoj.org/2026/09/daniel-katz-new-editor-in-chief","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789689600,"rid":"zrh9j-8v522","summary":"[From Arfon] Earlier this year I announced that I was stepping down as Editor-in-Chief of JOSS after ten years in the role, and we put out a call for a new EiC. Today I'm delighted to announce that Daniel S. Katz is taking over as Editor-in-Chief, effective 18 September 2026. Dan was one of the people who helped shape JOSS before it even existed.","tags":["Announcements"],"title":"Daniel S. Katz is the new Editor-in-Chief of JOSS","updated_at":1789749931,"url":"https://blog.joss.theoj.org/2026/09/daniel-katz-new-editor-in-chief","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Eden","given":"Terence","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9265-9069"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"61ce553a-bafd-4aba-a952-d3bab5e85bcc","created":1788652800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Regular nonsense about tech and its effects \ud83d\ude43","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/shkspr","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/61ce553a-bafd-4aba-a952-d3bab5e85bcc/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/feed/DOI","filter":"category:-1982","generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog","issn":"2753-1570","language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"shkspr","status":"active","subfield":"1712","title":"Terence Eden's Blog","updated":1789748084,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Terence Eden's Blog","blog_slug":"shkspr","content_html":"The Flywheel theatre company are reviving the rep tradition by having five actors perform five different plays in five weeks. Their interpretation of Moli\u00e8re's classic is gaudy and hilarious. Even the lighting cues are funny!
\n\nIt is fair to say that School for Wives isn't exactly an uncontroversial play. The plot basically boils down to \"Women! Eh? You can't live with them, you can't easily groom them from the age of four and keep them imprisoned so they become perfect submissives.\"
\n\nIs the fear of cuckoldry funny? Is it OK to laugh at a jealous rage which leads to controlling behaviour? Should we find joy in the emotional torment of our characters?
\n\nYes! Yes! And yes!
\n\nThe cast squeeze every last drop of humour from the script, the direction is nimble, and the play has been edited down to a more manageable 75ish minutes (plus extra time for corpsing and applause).
\n\nA simply joyous production which left us grinning throughout.
\n\nYou can see all their upcoming shows - which are very reasonably priced.
\n\nI'm a believer in making the entire visit to the theatre a special experience. Riverside Studio, Hammersmith is a great venue with generous foyer space and more than adequate toilet provision. Not a given in London theatres!
\n\nThe theatre programme is digital and provided via QR code. No \u00a36 rip off for a booklet full of adverts here.
\n\nAs we walked in, the cast were dotted around the stage an in the auditorium doing various bits of business which made for a jolly start.
\n\nPost curtain call there was a lovely speech from the cast thanking us for attending and letting us know about their future projects. Nothing wrong with a piece of shameless advertising to a captive audience \ud83d\ude04
\n\nOverall an excellent theatrical experience.
![](\"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/wp-content/themes/edent-wordpress-theme/info/okgo.php?ID=75485&HTTP_REFERER=JSON\"){kind=small}
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/r0cff-96c14","guid":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/?p=75485","image":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/wives.webp","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789689600,"rid":"33070-9q085","summary":"The Flywheel theatre company are reviving the rep tradition by having five actors perform five different plays in five weeks. Their interpretation of Moli\u00e8re's classic is gaudy and hilarious. Even the lighting cues are funny! It is fair to say that School for Wives isn't exactly an uncontroversial play. The plot basically boils down to \"Women!","tags":["/etc/","Theatre Review"],"title":"Theatre Review: The School for Wives - at Riverside Studios","updated_at":1789731310,"url":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2026/09/theatre-review-the-school-for-wives/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"name":"Freie Universit\u00e4t Berlin, Open Research Office Berlin"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Duine","given":"Maaike","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3412-7192"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2","created":1694476800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":null,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/oaberlin","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/feed/atom/","filter":null,"generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin","issn":null,"language":"deu","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"oaberlin","status":"active","subfield":"1802","title":"Open Research Blog Berlin","updated":1789648456,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Open Research Blog Berlin","blog_slug":"oaberlin","content_html":"Faires, wissenschaftsgeleitetes Open-Access-Publizieren gewinnt zunehmend an Bedeutung, nicht zuletzt durch die Priorisierungsagenda der BUA-Einrichtungen zur Umsetzung des Open-Science-Leitbilds und das Positionspapier zu Open Research der Berliner Landesinitiative. Doch welche Alternativen zu etablierten, oft kommerziellen Publikationswegen gibt es eigentlich, und wie funktionieren sie?
\nIn diesem einst\u00fcndigen Lunch Meeting stellen wir Ihnen ausgew\u00e4hlte Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales Publizieren vor, von fachspezifischen Verlagen wie SciPost oder Open Library of Humanities bis hin zu neuen Publishing-Tools wie Octopus. Ein Praxisbericht von Forschenden erg\u00e4nzt die Vorstellung der Publishing-Tools. Dar\u00fcber hinaus geben wir Einblick in die Angebote von Berlin Universities Publishing. Im Anschluss bleibt ausreichend Zeit f\u00fcr Fragen und Diskussion.
\nDas Meeting findet im Rahmen der internationalen Open Access Week statt und richtet sich an alle Forschenden, die mehr \u00fcber faire und offene Publikationsm\u00f6glichkeiten erfahren m\u00f6chten. Das Thema der diesj\u00e4hrigen Open Access Week lautet \"The Cost of Knowledge\": Entsprechend nehmen wir das Motto zum Anlass, um Alternativen zu kommerziell ausgerichteten Publikationsm\u00f6glichkeiten vorzustellen.
\nOffen und fair Publizieren: Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales, nicht-kommerzielles Publizieren\n-Wann: Montag, 19.10.2026, 13:00-14:00 Uhr\n-Wo: Online\n-Registrierung: Anmeldung per Webex\n
Organisiert von:
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/xcjqw-q0t82","guid":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/?p=4343","language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789603200,"rid":"99595-v5p57","summary":"Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales, nicht-kommerzielles Publizieren Faires, wissenschaftsgeleitetes Open-Access-Publizieren gewinnt zunehmend an Bedeutung, nicht zuletzt durch die Priorisierungsagenda der BUA-Einrichtungen zur Umsetzung des Open-Science-Leitbilds und das Positionspapier zu Open Research der Berliner Landesinitiative.","tags":["Allgemein","Aktuelles","Berlin","Bibliotheken","Open Access"],"title":"Online Lunch Meeting: Offen und fair Publizieren","updated_at":1789716613,"url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/2026/09/17/online-lunch-meeting-offen-und-fair-publizieren/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/041qv0h25","name":"Deutsches Arch\u00e4ologisches Institut, Zentrale"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"von Schr\u00f6der","given":"Asta","url":"https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5852-771X"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"d21c5e78-88bc-432c-a20b-4e8a8ead1693","created":1752796800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Wissenslabor f\u00fcr naturwissenschaftliche Sammlungen und objektzentrierte Daten","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/winoda","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/d21c5e78-88bc-432c-a20b-4e8a8ead1693/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://winoda.de/feed/atom/","filter":null,"generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://winoda.de","issn":null,"language":"deu","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"winoda","status":"active","subfield":"1209","title":"WiNoDa Knowledge Lab","updated":1789654043,"use_api":false},"blog_name":"WiNoDa Knowledge Lab","blog_slug":"winoda","content_html":"\n
Was lange w\u00e4hrt, wird endlich gut \u2013 oder so hei\u00dft es.
Mit dem Start des Wintersemesters geht das WiNoDa Knowledge Lab noch einmal richtig in die Vollen: BYOD data clinic am 6. und 9. Oktober 2026, Finale des WiNoDa Hackathon am 14./15. Oktober 2026, WiNoDa Konferenz am 21. Oktober 2026 \u2013 und auch unsere Selbstlernkurse wollen wir noch einmal \"richtig\" gl\u00e4nzen lassen.
Deshalb laden wir alle Interessierten ein, teilzunehmen an unserer WiNoDa Data Expedition: F\u00fcnf Wochen begleitetes Selbststudium rund um Forschungsdaten, Sammlungen und digitale Methoden \u2013 nat\u00fcrlich kostenfrei auf https://moodle.winoda.de/!
Wenn Ihr Euren Lernplan lieber selbst gestalten m\u00f6chtet, aber den Austausch mit anderen nicht missen wollt\u2013 dann ist die WiNoDa Data Expedition genau richtig! Ihr k\u00f6nnt Euch mit den Kursentwicklern austauschen, Eure Fragen stellen und gemeinsam \u00fcberlegen, wie sich das Gelernte konkret anwenden l\u00e4sst. Und Ihr trefft Menschen wieder, denen Ihr vielleicht schon bei einem Webinar oder Workshop begegnet seid\u2013 jetzt habt Ihr endlich Zeit, Euch n\u00e4her kennenzulernen.
\n![\"Social-Media-Bild](\"https://winoda.de/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Data-Expedition.png\")
Wir starten alle gemeinsam am
\nDirekt danach beginnt Eure
\n![\"\ud83d\ude2f\"](\"https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/72x72/1f62f.png\")
) unsere Kurse absolvieren wollt, bleibt Eurer Entscheidung \u00fcberlassen. F\u00fcr jeden absolvierten Kurs erhaltet Ihr einen Badge und ein Zertifikat.Zum Abschluss treffen wir uns noch einmal alle gemeinsam am
\nAlle unsere Selbstlernkurse sind auf englisch. Die Fertigstellung eines jeden Kurses wird mit einem Zertifikat bescheinigt.
\nDie Registrierung bleibt w\u00e4hrend der gesamten Data Expedition ge\u00f6ffnet \u2013 Nachz\u00fcgler sind jederzeit willkommen!
\nKursangebot","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/w6zk6-8pb65","guid":"https://winoda.de/?p=15680","image":"https://winoda.de/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Data-Expedition.png","language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789603200,"rid":"nbgw5-3tm14","summary":"Was lange w\u00e4hrt, wird endlich gut \u2013 oder so hei\u00dft es.Mit dem Start des Wintersemesters geht das WiNoDa Knowledge Lab noch einmal richtig in die Vollen: BYOD data clinic am [\u2026]","tags":["WiNoDa Knowledge Lab Journal","CfP","Datenkompetenz","FDM","OER"],"title":"Call for Participants: WiNoDa Data Expedition, 01.10.-05.11.2026. F\u00fcnf Wochen begleitetes Selbststudium rund um Forschungsdaten, Sammlungen und digitale Methoden.","updated_at":1789716613,"url":"https://winoda.de/2026/09/17/call-for-participants-winoda-data-expedition-01-10-05-11-2026-fuenf-wochen-begleitetes-selbststudium-rund-um-forschungsdaten-sammlungen-und-digitale-methoden/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/046ak2485","name":"Freie Universit\u00e4t Berlin"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Fischer","given":"Georg","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5620-5759"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2","created":1694476800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":null,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/oaberlin","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/feed/atom/","filter":null,"generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin","issn":null,"language":"deu","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"oaberlin","status":"active","subfield":"1802","title":"Open Research Blog Berlin","updated":1789648456,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Open Research Blog Berlin","blog_slug":"oaberlin","content_html":"
- RRP - Reusability and its relevance (Basic, ca. 40 minutes)
- RRP - Reusing object-related research data (Basic, ca. 1.5 hours)
- RDM - Core concepts of data quality in research data management (Intermediate, ca. 1,5 hours)
- RDM - Data Governance. Strategies for quality improvement in collection data (Intermediate, ca. 2 hours)
- Regulatory Frameworks for Data Acquisition in Fieldwork (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
- ATR 1 - Introduction: Basic concepts, terminology and workflow of Automatic Text Recognition (ATR) (Basic, ca. 2 hours)
- ATR 2 - Deep Dive: Preprocessing and software selection (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
- ATR 3 \u2013 Deep Dive: Transcription and semantic enrichment (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
- ATR 4 - Deep Dive: Model Training and Publishing (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
Weitere Kurse sind noch in der Entwicklung und werden zu Moodle hinzugef\u00fcgt, sobald sie fertig sind.
Unsere monatliche Rubrik zu aktuellen Veranstaltungen rund um Open Research.
\nAnmerkung zu dieser Rubrik: Das Open Research Office Berlin erstellt monatlich eine \u00dcbersicht \u00fcber Termine und Veranstaltungen zu Open Access und Open Research in Berlin bzw. an Berliner Einrichtungen. Der Fokus liegt dabei auf unseren Partnereinrichtungen und auf Veranstaltungen, die sich an die \u00d6ffentlichkeit richten bzw. die offen sind f\u00fcr Angeh\u00f6rige der Wissenschafts- und Kulturerbeeinrichtungen in Berlin. Wir erg\u00e4nzen diese Liste gerne (Info bitte via Mail ans OROB).\n\n
Wie gehen Einrichtungen des Kulturerbes mit den Zeugnissen der Vergangenheit um? Nutzen sie diese, um bestimmte Sichtweisen historischer Entwicklungen zu st\u00fctzen, oder \u00fcberlassen sie die Bewertung den Nutzenden und erm\u00f6glichen vor allem den Zugang zu den Quellen? W\u00e4hrend Museen mit kuratierten Ausstellungen h\u00e4ufig st\u00e4rker interpretierend arbeiten, verstehen sich Archive und Bibliotheken traditionell eher als Einrichtungen, die sich auf den Zugang zu ihren Best\u00e4nden konzentrieren. Diese Rollenverteilung ger\u00e4t jedoch unter Druck, wenn es um ein schwieriges Erbe \u2013 etwa rassistische oder antisemitische Zeugnisse \u2013 geht: Archive werden kritisiert, wenn sie scheinbar ungefilterten Zugang gew\u00e4hren, w\u00e4hrend zugleich geschichtspolitische Eingriffe in Kulturerbeeinrichtungen kontrovers diskutiert werden.
\n2026 findet die dritte Ausgabe des gro\u00dfen OER-Fachtags von ORCA.nrw statt. Freuen Sie sich \u00fcber den Tag hinweg auf eine spannende Keynote, Projektvorstellungen, Workshops und viel Austausch & Vernetzung!
\nIm Vortrag wird, ankn\u00fcpfend an das Blockchain-Projekt f\u00fcr digitale Zeugnisse, die EUDI-Wallet thematisiert. Die Historie der Entwicklung dieser digitalen Brieftasche auf EU-Ebene wird vorgestellt und die Funktionen und M\u00f6glichkeiten sowie Detailinformationen zur Sicherheit werden erl\u00e4utert. Der aktuelle Stand der Entwicklung wird betrachtet und in Form einer Demo wird die Nutzung an einem konkreten Beispiel veranschaulicht. Nach einem Blick auf zuk\u00fcnftige Entwicklungen im Bereich \"Digitaler Identit\u00e4ten\", wie z. B. Post-Quanten-Verschl\u00fcsselung oder Alternative Biometrische Identifikationsverfahren (AuBi) schlie\u00dft der Abend mit Raum f\u00fcr Diskussionen \u00fcber die Technologie und deren Nutzung.
\nDer Einsatz von KI Technologien erstreckt sich zunehmend auf zentrale Bereiche politischer Steuerung, von der \u00f6ffentlichen Verwaltung und der Umweltpolitik bis hin zu Grenzregimen und wirtschaftlicher Regulierung. Dabei ver\u00e4ndern sie nicht nur Verfahren; es verschieben sich Machtkonstellationen, Verantwortung und politische Handlungsspielr\u00e4ume. Das Symposium mit \u00f6ffentlicher Paneldiskussion diskutiert KI als systemische Herausforderung f\u00fcr Demokratie und Rechtsstaat. Die Veranstaltung bietet kurze Einf\u00fchrungen in verschiedene Schwerpunkte unserer Forschung und erm\u00f6glicht eine kollaborative Plattform zur Diskussion der systemischen Kosten algorithmischer Governance f\u00fcr demokratische Strukturen. Dies schafft einen offenen Raum f\u00fcr Austausch mit politischen Entscheidungstr\u00e4ger*innen, Vertreter*innen von NGOs, Forschenden sowie allen, die an der Zukunft einer digitalen Gesellschaft interessiert sind.
\nDas Digitale ist ein gro\u00dfes Versprechen: Physische R\u00e4ume und pers\u00f6nliche Speichermedien scheinen ganz \u00fcberfl\u00fcssig zu werden, die Cloud soll ortsunabh\u00e4ngigen, schnellen Zugriff und unbegrenzten Speicherplatz erm\u00f6glichen. Aber was kostet das, welche L\u00f6sungen sind sicher und umweltvertr\u00e4glich?\u00a0Gemeinsam mit bestandserhaltenden Einrichtungen und Vertreter:innen aus Wissenschaft und Forschung wollen wir das Versprechen des Digitalen \u00fcberpr\u00fcfen und konstruktive Vorschl\u00e4ge zur longue dur\u00e9e des digitalen Erbes entwickeln. Es sprechen u.v. a.: Frank Scholze (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek), Richard Ovenden (Bodleian Library Oxford) und Petra Gehring (Rat f\u00fcr Informationsinfrastrukturen).
\nDas Open Science Forum Mitteldeutschland 2026 bringt am 5. Oktober Interessierte zu einem offenen Austausch \u00fcber Open Science als Gestaltungsaufgabe zusammen. Wir widmen uns der Frage, welche Rolle wissenschaftsunterst\u00fctzende Einrichtungen spielen, wenn es um neue Ans\u00e4tze in der Forschungsbewertung, nachhaltige Infrastrukturen und digitale Souver\u00e4nit\u00e4t im Spannungsfeld geopolitischer Entwicklungen geht.
\nIn Archiven, Bibliotheken und anderen Ged\u00e4chtniseinrichtungen lagern bundesweit gef\u00e4hrdete Originale, die Meinungsvielfalt, Rechtsordnungen, historische Entwicklungen und politisches Handeln dokumentieren. Der Erhalt dieser \u00dcberlieferungen ist Grundvoraussetzung f\u00fcr eine quellen- und faktenbasierte Forschung, eine historische Aufarbeitung sowie die Sichtbarmachung gesellschaftlicher Mehrstimmigkeit und Diskurse. Originalerhalt ist grundlegender Bestandteil der Informationssicherung und ein wichtiger Beitrag zu einer lebendigen, urteilsf\u00e4higen und wehrhaften Demokratie \u2013 insbesondere angesichts der zunehmenden Bedrohung durch hybride Desinformation und andere demokratiegef\u00e4hrdende Entwicklungen.
\nDie FDM-Sprechstunde Humanities@NFDI ist eine Online-Beratung f\u00fcr Studierende, Forschende oder Mitarbeitende aus Forschungs- und Sammlungsinstitutionen zu allen Fragen rund um das Forschungsdatenmanagement. Expert:innen aus den geisteswissenschaftlichen NFDI-Konsortien NFDI4Memory, NFDI4Culture, NFDI4Objects und Text+ stehen f\u00fcr Ihre Fragen zu allen Themen rund ums Forschungsdatenmanagement bereit. Bei Bedarf k\u00f6nnen Einzelgespr\u00e4che in Breakoutr\u00e4umen vertieft werden.
\nIncreasing consolidation and commercial control over all aspects of knowledge comes at a cost. This year's theme challenges us to consider the financial, human, and environmental costs of creating, sharing, and sustaining knowledge\u2014particularly when these costs are driven by private rather than public interests. Last year's theme of \"Who owns our knowledge?\" reflected on the reality of commercial ownership of knowledge. This year's theme will reckon with the costs of that reality and avenues for reclaiming control of these systems meant to serve the public interest.
\nIn diesem Workshop lernen die Teilnehmenden datenschutzkonforme KI-Anwendungen und Einsatzm\u00f6glichkeiten kennen, die neue Wege f\u00fcr die Nachnutzung von Forschungsdaten erm\u00f6glichen und zur Verbesserung von Datenqualit\u00e4t, Metadatenverf\u00fcgbarkeit und Zug\u00e4nglichkeit beitragen. Mithilfe konkreter Anwendungsf\u00e4lle aus der Forschung werden die rechtssicheren Einsatzm\u00f6glichkeiten der KI im Datenlebenzyklus vorgestellt.
\nFaires, wissenschaftsgeleitetes Open-Access-Publizieren gewinnt zunehmend an Bedeutung, nicht zuletzt durch die Priorisierungsagenda der BUA-Einrichtungen zur Umsetzung des Open-Science-Leitbilds und das Positionspapier zu Open Research der Berliner Landesinitiative. Doch welche Alternativen zu etablierten, oft kommerziellen Publikationswegen gibt es eigentlich, und wie funktionieren sie? In diesem einst\u00fcndigen Lunch Meeting stellen wir Ihnen ausgew\u00e4hlte Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales Publizieren vor.
\nDer Workshop f\u00fchrt in die Grundfunktionen von OpenRefine ein und zeigt an konkreten Anwendungsf\u00e4llen, wie Forschende tabellarische Datens\u00e4tze bereinigen, strukturieren und anreichern k\u00f6nnen. Dabei werden auch geskriptete Bearbeitungsschritte sowie der Import und Export verschiedener Datenformate (CSV, XML, JSON) behandelt. OpenRefine erm\u00f6glicht nicht nur einen schnellen \u00dcberblick \u00fcber gro\u00dfe Datens\u00e4tze, sondern hilft vor allem bei heterogenen und historisch gewachsenen Datens\u00e4tze, die oft inkonsistente Metadaten aufweisen.
\nDer Workshop gibt einen \u00dcberblick \u00fcber ELN-Konzepte, zeigt relevante Forschungsdatenmanagement-Aspekte auf und bietet eine praktische Einf\u00fchrung.
\nDer Aktionstag \"Forschungsdaten@BUA\" l\u00e4dt erstmals Forschende der Berlin University Alliance herzlich ein, \u00fcber den Umgang mit Forschungsdaten ins Gespr\u00e4ch zu kommen, sich auszutauschen und zu vernetzen. Ziel ist es, Best Practices sichtbar zu machen, Erfahrungen auszutauschen und den Dialog \u00fcber den Umgang mit Forschungsdaten \u00fcber die vier BUA-H\u00e4user hinweg auszubauen.
\nIm Rahmen dieses Hands-on-Workshops werden Konzepte zum effizienten, reproduzierbaren und nachvollziehbaren Arbeiten mit Forschungsdaten vermittelt. Ziel ist es, die Teilnehmenden mit verschiedenen Werkzeugen vertraut zu machen und das Bewusstsein f\u00fcr Computational Thinking, Automatisierung sowie die Optimierung eigener Arbeitsprozesse zu sch\u00e4rfen.
\nIm Forschungsalltag stehen Forschende regelm\u00e4\u00dfig vor urheberrechtlichen Fragen: Welche Inhalte darf ich in meiner Arbeit verwenden? Unter welchen Bedingungen kann ich Daten und Materialien offen teilen? Wie gehe ich mit KI-Tools und deren Trainingsdaten rechtssicher um? Dieser Workshop bietet praxisnahe Orientierung f\u00fcr den sicheren Umgang mit gesch\u00fctzten Inhalten und Lizenzen in der wissenschaftlichen Arbeit.
\nIn our three-part workshop series, we explore the relationship between the technical aspects, practical applications and critical reflection of the use of AI in research data management. Participants will learn about various AI tools and use cases for research data management, test, and develop criteria for the meaningful and responsible use of AI in their own work.
\nweiter zu November 2026 [in K\u00fcrze]
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/pzvzm-f9w08","guid":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/?p=4297","language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1788220800,"rid":"208kg-aed59","summary":"Unsere monatliche Rubrik zu aktuellen Veranstaltungen rund um Open Research. Anmerkung zu dieser Rubrik: Das Open Research Office Berlin erstellt monatlich eine \u00dcbersicht \u00fcber Termine und Veranstaltungen zu Open Access und Open Research in Berlin bzw. an Berliner Einrichtungen.","tags":["Veranstaltungshinweise"],"title":"Veranstaltungshinweise Oktober 2026","updated_at":1789716611,"url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/2026/09/01/veranstaltungshinweise-oktober-2026/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/0153tk833","name":"University of Virginia"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Turner","given":"Stephen","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9140-9028"}],"blog":{"authors":[{"name":"Stephen Turner"}],"community_id":"382941a7-2ffa-41df-8bbb-5f772188517f","created":1780876800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"A practicing data scientist's take on AI, genomics, biosecurity, and the ways AI is reshaping how science gets done. Weekly updates from the field. Occasional notes on programming.","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/stephenturner","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/382941a7-2ffa-41df-8bbb-5f772188517f/logo","feed_format":"application/rss+xml","feed_url":"https://blog.stephenturner.us/feed","filter":null,"generator":"Substack","home_page_url":"https://blog.stephenturner.us","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"stephenturner","status":"active","subfield":"1311","title":"Paired Ends","updated":1789660630,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Paired Ends","blog_slug":"stephenturner","content_html":"![\"\"](\"https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!pP50!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F0915558e-5ffb-4e52-8352-513c9d7ec745_1200x630.png\")
I'm starting a large biosecurity research program that I'll write about here soon that combines human subjects research, AI development and engineering, and policy. I've never had any formal training or experience in biotechnology policy, but after spending some time at last weekend's Global Challenges Project biosecurity meeting and meeting with NSCEB this week I'm starting to really try to connect the technical work we're doing here with what could be tangible policy recommendations and action. After all, we can publish all the whitepapers and journal articles we want, but if it never has a real-world impact and doesn't move the needle on biosecurity and AI safety policy, you'd be correct to question the value of doing the research in the first place. Thankfully, I have really stellar partners in our National Security Data and Policy Institute who are close collaborators with me and my colleagues here in SDS on this project. More soon, I promise.
There was a story in Politico this week reporting that OpenAI endorsed a set of bills in response to AI biothreats. All of them came out of the recommendations from last year's final report from the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology (NSCEB). They were written in part to fix a data problem: biological data sits in incompatible formats across dozens of repositories, and getting it into shape for AI training takes months of work per project.
Here are the three bills in question:
SCALE Biology would create a biometrology program at NIST, authorized at $55M in FY2026 rising to $85M by FY2030, covering measurement standards for engineering biology and biomanufacturing. Biorisk, biosafety, and biosecurity standards are item (E) in a 9-item list of program activities.
(c) Activities.\u2014In carrying out the biometrology laboratory program, the Director shall carry out the following:
[\u2026]
(E) The development of technical standards, guidelines, best practices, methodologies, procedures, and processes that can inform and address biorisk, biosafety, and biosecurity concerns.
The AI-Ready Bio-Data Standards Act gives NIST two years to define what \"AI-ready\" means for a biological dataset (See also: NSF 26-512) and to set minimum requirements for federally funded research that generates biological data, instructing that those requirements not exceed the resources grantees actually have.
(ii) REQUIREMENTS FOR DEFINITION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-READY.\u2014
(I) IN GENERAL.\u2014In facilitating the establishment of the definition of the term \"artificial intelligence-ready\" under clause (i)(I), the Director shall take such actions as may be necessary to ensure such definition, when applied to a biological dataset, requires such dataset be generated and formatted in a manner that\u2014
(aa) enables the effective use of the dataset for training artificial intelligence models; and
(bb) supports advancements in research relating to artificial intelligence and biotechnology.
The Web of Biological Data Act has DOE competitively award a national lab the job of building a single entry point to federal biological data.
(2) CONTENTS.\u2014The Web shall\u2014
(A) serve as a single point of entry for researchers to access different sources of biological data, especially those funded by the Federal Government, by directly hosting data or providing access to existing databases;
(B) have metrics and metadata to indicate data quality, including usability, interoperability, and completeness; and
(C) include tiered levels of cybersecurity safeguards and access controls to protect different types of biological data assets hosted in or connected to the Web.
Richard Johnson, who runs national security risk mitigation at OpenAI, said that data and standards are prerequisites for measuring how model capability bears on biosecurity.
We need to be worried both about the safety and the risk side, but we also need to be looking at the opportunities for getting the tools into the hands of the defenders.
A single well-documented entry point to federal biological data helps everyone, including the foreign actors Anthropic caught using its models for pathogen work this year.
The Web of Biological Data bill requires tiered cybersecurity safeguards and access controls scaled to data sensitivity, an independent assessment of those controls every two years, and an advisory board with at least one biosecurity expert. It doesn't say how a dataset gets assigned to a tier.
Caitlin Frazer, executive director of the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology (a congressionally established body that is also supporting the bills) also provided commentary for the article.
High-quality, AI-ready biological data must be treated like a strategic national resource.
It absolutely must be. I couldn't agree more.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/2a585-hwx09","guid":"216168232","image":"https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!pP50!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F0915558e-5ffb-4e52-8352-513c9d7ec745_1200x630.png","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789603200,"rid":"e4hqy-xsh46","summary":"Standardizing federal biological data to maintain US competitiveness in AI and biotechnology","tags":["Biosecurity","AI"],"title":"Three biological data bills, with OpenAI support","updated_at":1789716610,"url":"https://blog.stephenturner.us/p/biodata-bills-nsceb","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/027xymc69","name":"Agence Bibliographique de l'Enseignement Sup\u00e9rieur"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Melzac","given":"Carole","url":"https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1446-079X"},{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Riquelme","given":"Carlos"}],"blog":{"authors":[{"name":"ROR Team"}],"community_id":"c709442a-2058-4f0b-9c81-5199efd7b9e0","created":1780876800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"The Research Organization Registry (ROR) is a global, community-led registry of open persistent identifiers for research and funding organizations.","doi":null,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/c709442a-2058-4f0b-9c81-5199efd7b9e0/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://ror.org/feed.xml","filter":null,"generator":"Hugo","home_page_url":"https://ror.org/","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":null,"relative_url":null,"secure":null,"slug":"ror","status":"active","subfield":"1710","title":"Research Organization Registry (ROR)","updated":1789658423,"use_api":null},"blog_name":"Research Organization Registry (ROR)","blog_slug":"ror","content_html":"\nFrance's Bibliographic Agency for Higher Education and Research (ABES) explains how and why thousands of French dissertations are so well-described in Crossref DOI metadata with ROR IDs and more.
\nA French version of this post is available on the ABES blog. Many thanks to Carlos Riquelme for assistance with English translation.
\nABES stands for Agence bibliographique de l'enseignement sup\u00e9rieur (Bibliographic Agency for Higher Education and Research)1 and was created in 1994 as a public body. Its initial goal was to create a national union catalogue for all university libraries in France, based on shared cataloguing, known as Sudoc (Syst\u00e8me Universitaire de Documentation). A particular emphasis was then placed on managing PhD theses, as ABES became in charge of the legal deposit of all doctoral dissertations defended in France with a nationwide statutory mandate; not only are they present in the Sudoc, but they are described in a rich metadata model (TEF, details in French on the ABES website) using software developed in-house by ABES and made available through a dedicated portal: theses.fr.
\nThe tracking and identification of French PhD theses started in 1985 by assigning an identifier called NNT (Num\u00e9ro National de Th\u00e8se). The NNT combines 3 parts of 4 characters: the first is the year, the second is a code for the institution that grants the diploma and the last sequence is attributed by the organisation on a unique basis, mostly incrementally.
\n![\"Diagram](\"https://ror.org/img/blog/abes/abes-01.png\"/)
Structure of the French Num\u00e9ro National de Th\u00e8se.
\nA URI for each French thesis can be built using the prefix theses.fr/ and adding the NNT; highlighting ABES' early concern about promoting identifiers and Open Science. The URI for this thesis is https://theses.fr/2026SORUL032.
As has been the case across many other countries, a national strategy for open science and the adoption of persistent identifiers has been put in place in France. The French ministry for higher education and research in its effort to promote PIDs entrusted ABES with a project to assign Crossref Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) to all French doctoral dissertations, with two major goals:
\nEnhance digital preservation by relying on a robust, well-established international identifier schema such as the DOI
\nBuild on and benefit from Crossref infrastructure and presence in the ecosystem.
\nThe project was kicked off in 2025 with an ABES team with Carlos Riquelme as Product Owner. The Crossref metadata schema (now at version 5.5) is not as tailored for detailed description of theses as the TEF format that includes subject indexing and peculiar relationships such as jury [dissertation committee] members. And Crossref only accepts the cr\u00e8me de la cr\u00e8me as PIDs: ORCID for individuals and ROR for organisations, which are not natively present in the thesis metadata because theses are described using ABES' own reference database, called IdRef. Derived from the authority file of our good old Sudoc, IdRef underpins several bibliographic databases, including theses.fr, but also library catalogs in French-speaking countries in Europe (University of Li\u00e8ge in Belgium; Swiss networks RERO, Renouvaud, and SLSP) and publishers (Cairn, OpenEdition). IdRef is used as a source of trusted data for individual contributors, organisations, and key concepts.
\nHow did ORCID and ROR IDs make their way into IdRef data? No magic \u2013 it is the result of the combined effort of a distributed network of 3,000+ catalogers feeding into the databases (Sudoc, theses.fr, and so on), and a centralized coordination by ABES.
\nRegarding ORCID, the longstanding relationship started with a Memorandum of Understanding in 2016. Alongside co-leading the French ORCID consortium together with Couperin, ABES focused on the gigantic data dump provided yearly by ORCID, aiming to scrutinize French adoption of the most prominent PIDs for individual contributors, and matching ORCIDs to IdRef IDs based on algorithm analyzing co-authorship. In September 2026, almost 195,000 IdRef records carry an ORCID as an external identifier \u2013 and this is 18% more than the previous year. Toggling from an IdRef record to an ORCID is seamless: a micro API designed as https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2orcid/[idref] gives an instant result, as in the example below:
![\"Markup](\"https://ror.org/img/blog/abes/abes-02.png\"/)
IdRef markup with an ORCID ID. https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2orcid/150117671
\nIt is exactly the same process to jump from an IdRef to a ROR ID, this time using the micro API https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2ror/[idref], as in the example below:
![\"Markup](\"https://ror.org/img/blog/abes/abes-03.png\"/)
IdRef markup with a ROR ID. https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2ror/033702462
\nMaintaining the matching between IdRef and ROR is dead easy for this use case, as there are only 220 research organisations involved. Some of them change, as the French higher education and research landscape has been rather dynamic those past 15 years, with constant mergers and legal status changes. Fortunately ABES relies on local librarians to track those changes. Again, for all IdRef records (including labs and other facilities) the matching with ROR is the result of aggregate efforts of our invaluable network of librarians on top of the centralized action that ran modestly during 2021-2024 (more details in French on the ABES blog). The matching for organisations associated with PhD theses, due to the small volume, has involved a good bit of manual work, allowing human eyes to do careful checking.
\nAs always, a huge thank you to ROR curation team, and especially Adam Buttrick, for all the help along the way!
\nIt's worth pointing out that, although ROR and ORCID are \"recommended\" by Crossref, at ABES we decided to go the extra mile and make ROR IDs part of our mandatory metadata when registering DOIs. As a result, ROR IDs are now included, and ORCIDs whenever available, in every DOI deposit for a PhD thesis in France.
\nAlmost 180,000 Crossref DOIs have been registered for back-year PhD theses in April 2026, and this does explain the sudden appearance of ABES at the top of the list of organisations registering ROR in Crossref metadata. But DOI registration is now an ongoing process for French PhD theses, and we expect around 10-13,000 to be added each year. We're going up, up, up \u2013 it's our moment! \ud83d\ude09
\nHaving ORCID and ROR IDs in French PhD theses' metadata spread over the world thanks to Crossref's robust infrastructure should enhance French research's visibility: today, 33,000+ ORCID profiles have been updated with the PhD thesis as a Work, due to researchers' accepted delegation to Crossref. The whole process shows the pivotal role of national PIDs such as IdRef to connect local knowledge and international science, in line with the seminal white paper by Morebrain: It's \"ORCID and\u2026\" , not \"ORCID or\u2026\".
\nThere are 3 candidates in ROR searching for \"ABES\", the two other located in India and Pakistan. \ud83d\ude09\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e
\nAs we recently wrote, there is really no agreed-upon definition of what a preprint is. And even if we could agree, it would not settle the question of what constitutes a preprint server. As we have been looking to study preprints and their role in scholarly communications, we have been looking to generate a directory of servers that, even if flawed or limited, can give us a common starting point for examining preprints and the culture around them.\u00a0
\nUnsurprisingly, we are not alone in this. ASAPbio, an organization dedicated to promoting the use of preprints, is looking to update their directory of preprints. We shared some of our insights with them, and thought some of our feedback might also be more useful to the broader community.\u00a0
\nMost importantly, any directory will need to operationalize their definition of what constitutes a preprint server.\u00a0
\nOur own attempts at constructing a list of preprint servers indicates a wide range of platforms and publishers allow authors to post preprints, but whether these should be called \"preprint servers\" is far from settled. Researchers can post preprints to venues dedicated exclusively to preprints; publish/review/curate platforms; journal-based platforms that publish both preprints and peer-reviewed articles; general repositories that accept preprints among other types of research outputs; and the list goes on.\u00a0
\nWhile there may not be a single or right answer to \"what is a preprint server,\" a directory cannot function as a meaningful community resource without\u00a0 a clear operational definition. Its creators must explain what is included, what is excluded, and why.
\nA useful directory needs more than just a list of venues and services\u2014it requires descriptive information that lets users filter and understand the landscape. The challenge lies in how one captures that information. When assessing whether a server has a particular policy, a simple “yes\" or \"no\" indicating whether a policy is “clear” tells only part of the story. A policy can be clear without being specific, and policies that appear similarly clear can differ substantially in their actual terms.
\nIn our own analysis, we encountered exactly this problem. Instead of forcing policies into binary categories, directories should specify which characteristics matter for each policy area, then document those details explicitly. For example, rather than simply recording whether a server has a withdrawal policy, a directory should indicate who can request a withdrawal, under what circumstances, and how the withdrawal is reflected in the scholarly record. Leave fields blank where no clear policy exists\u2014but do the work of showing what the policy actually says.
\nBuilding a useful directory of preprint servers is more complex than it might initially seem. It requires not just listing which servers exist, but making deliberate choices about which definitions to use and then describing policies with enough nuance that researchers and other stakeholders can actually make informed decisions. Without this intentionality\u2014both in definition and in detail\u2014directories risk becoming incomplete or misleading resources. The good news is that the current moment offers an opportunity to get this right.
\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.59350/zqh03-rx293
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/zqh03-rx293","guid":"https://www.scholcommlab.ca/?p=6277","image":"https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/4.png","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789516800,"rid":"ysgyz-n4s56","summary":"As we recently wrote, there is really no agreed-upon definition of what a preprint is. And even if we could [\u2026]","tags":["Research","Preprints"],"title":"Advice for a Preprint Services Directory","updated_at":1789797827,"url":"https://www.scholcommlab.ca/2026/09/16/advice-for-a-preprint-services-directory/","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/03wc8by49","name":"Posit Software, PBC (United States)"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Clawson","given":"James","url":"https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6756-0607"},{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Kaczmarek","given":"Ursula"},{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/019jywm96","name":"rOpenSci"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Ross","given":"Noam","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2136-0000"},{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Delaney","given":"Scott","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0813-018X"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"3446712e-ab03-4bb7-8641-571dcda8d8cd","created":1787702400,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Tracking disruptions to U.S. federal science funding, grant by grant.","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/grantwitness","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/3446712e-ab03-4bb7-8641-571dcda8d8cd/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://grantwitness.org/updates/rogue-scholar.xml","filter":null,"generator":"Other","home_page_url":"https://grantwitness.org/updates?type=updates","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"grantwitness","status":"active","subfield":"3321","title":"Grant Witness","updated":1789516800,"use_api":null},"blog_name":"Grant Witness","blog_slug":"grantwitness","content_html":"Together with our partner States United Democracy Center, Grant Witness today launched Lost Funds, an interactive tracker that provides a holistic look at federal grants that have been canceled, frozen, delayed, or otherwise interrupted since Trump took office in January 2025. The tool documents $177 billion in federal funding disruptions across all 50 states and Washington D.C., spanning 17 policy sectors, and examines impacts in communities across the country.
\n\"By bringing thousands of funding disruptions from the Trump administration together in one, centralized website, the Lost Funds Tracker puts the magnitude of their impact on full display,\" said Scott Delaney, Co-Founder of Grant Witness. \"The impact of funding cuts at this scale cannot be overstated. These disruptions touch everything from health care and disaster relief to technology and agriculture. The data tells a story about the consequences communities face as a result of the cuts, and the resources they're fighting relentlessly to preserve.\"
\n\"Many states have been fighting the impacts of federal funding disruptions one grant at a time ever since Trump took office,\" said Kelly Rader, Research Director at the States United Democracy Center. \"This is funding for states that has already been approved by Congress. But the Trump administration is trying to take unliteral action to stop that money from reaching the communities it's meant for. Lost Funds illustrates just how widespread these funding cuts are, the scale of the harm they've caused, and how states are once again on the front lines protecting their residents.\"
\nLost Funds provides a comprehensive overview of funding disruptions from the past 20 months, covering the Trump administration's attempt to freeze funding during his first week in office and each subsequent disruption across health care, education, transportation, disaster relief, science and technology, and more. It includes an overview of state efforts to challenge the disruptions and the funding they've restored for their communities.
\nKey takeaways from the Lost Funds national landscape:
\nExplore the national picture and drill down by state, program, sector, and grant recipient here.
\nThe Lost Funds Tracker will be updated regularly as the Trump administration takes new actions to disrupt funding, state lawsuits move through the courts, and stories of consequences in communities are told.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/y27rm-4dq03","guid":"https://doi.org/10.59350/y27rm-4dq03","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789516800,"rid":"126yg-ben14","summary":"Together with our partner States United Democracy Center, Grant Witness today launched Lost Funds, an interactive tracker that provides a holistic look at federal grants that have been canceled, frozen, delayed, or otherwise interrupted since Trump took office in January 2025.","title":"Tracking $177 Billion in Disrupted Federal Grants with the Lost Funds Project","updated_at":1789797806,"url":"https://grantwitness.org/updates/tracking-177-billion-in-disrupted-federal-grants-with-the-lost-funds-project","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"name":"Open Humans Foundation"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Greshake Tzovaras","given":"Bastian","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9925-9623"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"c1baf1e7-80ce-43eb-bc1c-a978dd7d62c9","created":1712793600,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Bastian Greshake Tzovaras is an open/citizen science activist and researcher with a background in biology and bioinformatics. He worked as a senior researcher at The Alan Turing Institute and Inserm. In 2011, he founded openSNP. He was awarded a PhD","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/tzovar","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/c1baf1e7-80ce-43eb-bc1c-a978dd7d62c9/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://tzovar.as/feed.xml","filter":null,"generator":"Jekyll","home_page_url":"https://tzovar.as/","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"tzovar","status":"active","subfield":"3305","title":"Bastian Greshake Tzovaras |","updated":1789562700,"use_api":null},"blog_name":"Bastian Greshake Tzovaras |","blog_slug":"tzovar","content_html":"\nHow we politicize technology in service of a better world is an open and contested question.\nA few days ago I shared a piece on historicising enshittification. \nIn it, Arvind L. U. explores the limits of how Doctorow's framing around that term is both ahistorical, in that it limits itself to a view that ignores the realities of the global south, and lacking imagination for not even considering a real alternative political economy of the internet.\nIn response, Henrik shared a quote out of Digital Solidarity \u2013 a new book by Aline Blankertz and Malte Engeler \u2013 which similarly considers the enshittification framing to conceal the fact that it's the pinnacle of capitalism and not an aberration.
\nIntrigued by this, I really wanted to read the whole, longer argument that Aline & Malte are making in their book.\nLuckily, I managed to score a review copy of it, which I went through over the weekend.\nAs the book is unfortunately right now only available in German, I thought I'd at least attempt to give a small review and summary of why I'm glad I read it.
\nStructurally, the book is divided into two parts:\nThe first half analyses the status quo of capitalist digitization.\nHow does the spread of digital technologies help legitimize and drive capitalism and authoritarian structures? \nThe second half then dives into their counter proposal of digital solidarity and how digital technologies could be used in an emancipatory way.\nJointly, both halves explore which technologies can be appropriated for progressive causes (and how), and which ones are irredeemable.
\nThe first half of the book starts off very strong.\nIt outlines well how society has \u2013 at least in parts intentionally \u2013 been shaped to a certain level of apathy about the future, in which societal progress for many has been reduced to the production cycles of new devices and software.\nAnd in which collective imaginaries make the existing capitalist appear natural, where people might consider rejecting discrimination based on race, but not overcoming class society.
\nLaunching from this, the book also provides a great exploration of how & why much of contemporary tech critique is failing by not focusing on the underlying capitalist structures that work as expected.\nWhether that's Zuboffs surveillance capitalism that appeals to the managerial class to please implement ethical business practices, technofeudalism or the above mentioned enshittification by Doctorow, which proposes the solution in enforcing more market competition and regulation.\nThey all locate the solution to existing problems with technology by making minor tweaks to the dominant economic dynamics, which not only do not question the reign of capitalism overall but risk reinforcing it.
\nThe meat of the critical analysis that follows consists of countering three of the big myths that surround digital technologies and the internet. Namely, that digitization is progress, that the internet democratizes and that open source can offer a counter to capitalist logics. \nOn the first point, Aline and Malte do a great job of exploring how the myth of digitally mediated progress takes the shape of a cyber-libertarianism that rejects the collective in favor of the individual, their responsibility and market forces.\nThis includes how the common ideas that degoogling, self-hosting, and a focus on privacy can end up not being emancipatory praxis, but libertarian isolation that in turn promotes technologies like cryptocurrencies and culminates in fascist ideals.
\nThese tendencies are tied neatly into the review of the democratizing potential of digital technology, which draws from the same cyber-libertarian framing\u2014and has mostly led to a concentration of power. \nPlatforms like Spotify, Airbnb, Uber etc. by no means have driven democratization, but have helped concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the platforms.\nAnalogous to how the push for generative 'AI' is working towards ensuring that creative activities will have to rely on renting AI-assistance.
\nI particularly enjoyed the last myth, on open source as counter culture, as it hits very close to home.\nFraming open source as the electric car of digital politics is in equal parts hilarious and fitting \u2013 especially in the context of German car culture:\nJust as the electric car is a step up over the internal combustion engine but doesn't challenge the car-centrism, open source software (OSS) has benefits over proprietary software but doesn't very little if anything to challenge the extractive nature of big technology corporations, which themselves profit tremendously from OSS.1
\nSuch extractivism is a tendency that is now even indirectly promoted through companies and civil society organisations alike2, by using labels such as digital public goods or digital public infrastructures, which contribute to concealing the ways in which the value from unpaid volunteer labor flows into corporations all while enshrining the offering of digital services as a task for society.\nAlong those lines, much of OSS also at least implicitly reproduces the dominant thinking and technological affordances of big technology companies and thus giving credence to them.
\nBut an emancipatory alternative to e.g. corporate-controlled social media needs to be more than just Twitter but open source.\nWhich OSS often falls short of, thanks to top-down control structures which are most often under the hegemony of an homogeneous (white, cis, male) elite.
\nAs already briefly mentioned above, the way that privacy is also used as a common concept by cyber-libertarians who focus on the creation of a hyper-individualist is getting some well deserved attention as well.\nThe EU's GDPR privacy regulations are equally the focus of a critical discussion, highlighting the explicitly colonial aspects of the regulation (by having a global ambition of forcing the rest of the world to adapt those rules as well) as well as the capitalist logic it operates in (by reinforcing that profit motives decide when & how personal data is used).
\nAnd lastly, there is of course the tight coupling between the technologies pushed by technology corporations and their relationship to authoritarianism, the military industrial complex, and eugenics, etc\u2026\nAll while society glorifies tech managers for bringing salvation progress, helping foster fascist praise for strong leaders.3
After all that critical analysis, the change of pace to envisioning a positive alternative was more than welcome.\nAnd Malte & Aline contrast their vision of digital solidarity very nicely with the currently trendy digital sovereignty.\nFaced with the political and economic violence touted by the United States, the European Union and many of their member states are touting the latter as an alternative.4\nWhile it might sound catchy, it generally falls squarely into the same nationalistic tropes of just needing an EU-based competitor to US big-tech instead of actively bringing about change.5
\nIn contrast, digital solidarity touches on the emancipation of the people using technology.\nHighlighting the original demands of the luddites \u2013 wanting a say in which technology is used and how \u2013 it explores how the digital could be different.\nOne bit I found particularly interesting was the framework by Andrea Vetter, which I didn't know before. Building on Illich's Tools for Conviviality, her work outlines 5 dimensions to assess technologies for their conviviality: Their impact on (human) connections, their accessibility, their interactions with the living world and their appropriateness in terms of resource input and output.
\nBased on their own luddite-informed model, and taking Vetter into account, Aline and Malte build their own criteria for an emancipatory technology critique:
\nBased on these three criteria, they outline nicely why 'AI' can not be used by the left as an emancipatory tool, for failing on all three counts:\nBy its very nature, it's a technology that does not harmonize abilities but concentrates power in the hands of the few, due to the requirements for large amounts of capital and training data, its inherent force for removing individual agency that removes collective action and the biases encoded in all training data.\nIt also is explicitly a technology that is created and marketed as \"all-purpose\", failing the question of excluding unwanted uses.\nAnd with respect to its appropriateness, the ecological, economical and societal damages have been documented extensively, for example due to resource use (water, fossil fuels, rare earth minerals mined in the global south\u2026) for 'AI' data centers.
\nIn the following chapters, the book goes on to outline a more positive view of how digital solidarity can form a counter model to the predominant discourses that suck up a lot of oxygen, without offering transformative options.\nActs of resistance, individual ones such as algorithmic sabotage, robot vandalism against (allegedly) self-driving cars, or the hacking of nazi dating platforms or collective ones such as group efforts against data centers can be one tool.\nAnd so can positive interventions such as repair-cafes, if they are sufficiently politicized to move beyond just the individual benefit.
\nThe bigger step and challenge proposed is about the ownership of the digital platforms.\nIn their current configurations, the harms created by them are a direct consequence of the extractivist profit logics they operate under:\nReal estate platforms deploy data science methods to help landlords to extract the maximum possible rents (and thus also maximize their own income).\nAnd the same applies to digital streaming services, and basic digital infrastructures like data centers in the hands of corporations.
\nUltimately, the book makes a convincing argument how shifting the control from private ownership into the collective would allow designing technologies that benefit everyone instead.\nWithout falling prey to tinkering on the margins by asking for interoperability, open source/data, it centers on envisioning technology that serves the public benefit and breaks with the capitalist logics.\nBuilding on Graeber & Wengrow, it shows how democratic control of the digital \u2013 that includes the freedom to leave, no obey and to build new social systems \u2013 can offer an alternative to the existing tech authoritarianism.
\nJointly, Aline & Malte make a great contribution to envision fights for digital technologies \u2013 and societies \u2013 that are anti-authoritarian, post-capitalist, and emancipatory.\nIf you read German, Digital Solidarity makes a great read to sharpen your thinking about how to approach the critique of digital technologies and gives a lot of food for thought on how to approach your own activism to overcome the status quo.\nAnd if you don't read German, my hope is that some of you are now at least curious about the concept.\nMaybe even enough to ask your favorite lefty publisher for suggesting putting out a translated version? ;-)
\nThere is also a good bit about the Open Source Initiative's open-washing of 'AI' through their misguided definition of 'open source AI', which explicitly does not require opening up training data and thus is mostly a push to legitimize these corporations' open-washing by giving an official label.\u00a0\u21a9
\nI'm glad to see more people critically evaluating civil society associations and other NGOs for their role in legitimizing existing power structures in their continuous quest for funding of full-time positions.\u00a0\u21a9
\nAs the book outlines, fascists profiting and putting technology into their service is not new, as IBM and the Holocaust demonstrates so well.\u00a0\u21a9
\nAlso here the role of civil society actors is highlighted for good reason: In their quest for funding and influence, many of them are uncritically jumping on that bandwagon as well.\u00a0\u21a9
\nAs an aside: The director general of the French National Institute for Geography tried to reframe sovereignty in an imho interesting way during his closing remarks of the State of the Map conference: The lesson from the commons is that sovereignty is not only about control. Sovereignty is not about closing doors, closing frontiers. You can also build sovereignty thanks to openness, [\u2026] thanks to cooperation. Thanks Marcos, for the transcription.\u00a0\u21a9
\n[From Arfon]
\nEarlier this year I announced that I was stepping down as Editor-in-Chief of JOSS after ten years in the role, and we put out a call for a new EiC. Today I'm delighted to announce that Daniel S. Katz is taking over as Editor-in-Chief, effective 18 September 2026.
\nDan was one of the people who helped shape JOSS before it even existed. He was part of the small group who helped refine what JOSS should be (and shouldn't be) in the months before we launched in May 2016. He went on to become one of our most active Associate Editors-in-Chief, and has been deeply involved in every significant editorial decision the journal has made over the past decade. I can't think of anyone better placed to lead JOSS into its next chapter.
\nDan and I will be working together over the coming weeks to transition EiC responsibilities.
\n[From Dan]
\nWhen Arfon first told me he was thinking of stepping down, back in 2019 while we were at Murrayfield Rugby Stadium (for a conference of course), I wondered if and how JOSS would survive. Fortunately, in the seven years since then, JOSS continued to thrive and grow, overcoming obstacles like the initial Covid period and then the increased impact of generative AI.
\nBy the time Arfon started talking about stepping down again last year, I had become confident that the JOSS community of associate-editors-in-chief (AEiCs) and editors would be able to keep the journal going. So when I applied to be EiC, I had a mix of feelings that included satisfaction about what we have done so far, confidence about the future and that our community could handle it, and some remaining fear about what I didn't know and wouldn't find out until I started.
\nNow, on the cusp of this transition, I'm really looking forward to working with the full JOSS community, including AEiCs and editors who have ideas about how we can improve the journal and its processes, other community members who continue to submit software and papers and to review them, and of course, Arfon, who we will continue to rely on as both the past/founding EiC and the continuing JOSS tech lead.
\nJOSS, as a developer-friendly diamond open access journal for research software packages that itself runs like an open source project and is a member of the open source community, isn't changing, and we'll continue to work collectively to improve research software and its recognition, and to provide scholarly credit for its developers and maintainers. Please join us by submitting or volunteering to review, and keep an eye out for other opportunities to contribute.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59349/pzaq7-0aq48","guid":"https://blog.joss.theoj.org/2026/09/daniel-katz-new-editor-in-chief","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789689600,"rid":"zrh9j-8v522","summary":"[From Arfon] Earlier this year I announced that I was stepping down as Editor-in-Chief of JOSS after ten years in the role, and we put out a call for a new EiC. Today I'm delighted to announce that Daniel S. Katz is taking over as Editor-in-Chief, effective 18 September 2026. Dan was one of the people who helped shape JOSS before it even existed.","tags":["Announcements"],"title":"Daniel S. Katz is the new Editor-in-Chief of JOSS","updated_at":1789749931,"url":"https://blog.joss.theoj.org/2026/09/daniel-katz-new-editor-in-chief","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Eden","given":"Terence","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9265-9069"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"61ce553a-bafd-4aba-a952-d3bab5e85bcc","created":1788652800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Regular nonsense about tech and its effects \ud83d\ude43","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/shkspr","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/61ce553a-bafd-4aba-a952-d3bab5e85bcc/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/feed/DOI","filter":"category:-1982","generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog","issn":"2753-1570","language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"shkspr","status":"active","subfield":"1712","title":"Terence Eden's Blog","updated":1789748084,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Terence Eden's Blog","blog_slug":"shkspr","content_html":"The Flywheel theatre company are reviving the rep tradition by having five actors perform five different plays in five weeks. Their interpretation of Moli\u00e8re's classic is gaudy and hilarious. Even the lighting cues are funny!
\n\nIt is fair to say that School for Wives isn't exactly an uncontroversial play. The plot basically boils down to \"Women! Eh? You can't live with them, you can't easily groom them from the age of four and keep them imprisoned so they become perfect submissives.\"
\n\nIs the fear of cuckoldry funny? Is it OK to laugh at a jealous rage which leads to controlling behaviour? Should we find joy in the emotional torment of our characters?
\n\nYes! Yes! And yes!
\n\nThe cast squeeze every last drop of humour from the script, the direction is nimble, and the play has been edited down to a more manageable 75ish minutes (plus extra time for corpsing and applause).
\n\nA simply joyous production which left us grinning throughout.
\n\nYou can see all their upcoming shows - which are very reasonably priced.
\n\nI'm a believer in making the entire visit to the theatre a special experience. Riverside Studio, Hammersmith is a great venue with generous foyer space and more than adequate toilet provision. Not a given in London theatres!
\n\nThe theatre programme is digital and provided via QR code. No \u00a36 rip off for a booklet full of adverts here.
\n\nAs we walked in, the cast were dotted around the stage an in the auditorium doing various bits of business which made for a jolly start.
\n\nPost curtain call there was a lovely speech from the cast thanking us for attending and letting us know about their future projects. Nothing wrong with a piece of shameless advertising to a captive audience \ud83d\ude04
\n\nOverall an excellent theatrical experience.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/r0cff-96c14","guid":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/?p=75485","image":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/wives.webp","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789689600,"rid":"33070-9q085","summary":"The Flywheel theatre company are reviving the rep tradition by having five actors perform five different plays in five weeks. Their interpretation of Moli\u00e8re's classic is gaudy and hilarious. Even the lighting cues are funny! It is fair to say that School for Wives isn't exactly an uncontroversial play. The plot basically boils down to \"Women!","tags":["/etc/","Theatre Review"],"title":"Theatre Review: The School for Wives - at Riverside Studios","updated_at":1789731310,"url":"https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2026/09/theatre-review-the-school-for-wives/","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"name":"Freie Universit\u00e4t Berlin, Open Research Office Berlin"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Duine","given":"Maaike","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3412-7192"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2","created":1694476800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":null,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/oaberlin","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/feed/atom/","filter":null,"generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin","issn":null,"language":"deu","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"oaberlin","status":"active","subfield":"1802","title":"Open Research Blog Berlin","updated":1789648456,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Open Research Blog Berlin","blog_slug":"oaberlin","content_html":"Faires, wissenschaftsgeleitetes Open-Access-Publizieren gewinnt zunehmend an Bedeutung, nicht zuletzt durch die Priorisierungsagenda der BUA-Einrichtungen zur Umsetzung des Open-Science-Leitbilds und das Positionspapier zu Open Research der Berliner Landesinitiative. Doch welche Alternativen zu etablierten, oft kommerziellen Publikationswegen gibt es eigentlich, und wie funktionieren sie?
\nIn diesem einst\u00fcndigen Lunch Meeting stellen wir Ihnen ausgew\u00e4hlte Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales Publizieren vor, von fachspezifischen Verlagen wie SciPost oder Open Library of Humanities bis hin zu neuen Publishing-Tools wie Octopus. Ein Praxisbericht von Forschenden erg\u00e4nzt die Vorstellung der Publishing-Tools. Dar\u00fcber hinaus geben wir Einblick in die Angebote von Berlin Universities Publishing. Im Anschluss bleibt ausreichend Zeit f\u00fcr Fragen und Diskussion.
\nDas Meeting findet im Rahmen der internationalen Open Access Week statt und richtet sich an alle Forschenden, die mehr \u00fcber faire und offene Publikationsm\u00f6glichkeiten erfahren m\u00f6chten. Das Thema der diesj\u00e4hrigen Open Access Week lautet \"The Cost of Knowledge\": Entsprechend nehmen wir das Motto zum Anlass, um Alternativen zu kommerziell ausgerichteten Publikationsm\u00f6glichkeiten vorzustellen.
\nOffen und fair Publizieren: Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales, nicht-kommerzielles Publizieren\n-Wann: Montag, 19.10.2026, 13:00-14:00 Uhr\n-Wo: Online\n-Registrierung: Anmeldung per Webex\n
Organisiert von:
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/xcjqw-q0t82","guid":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/?p=4343","language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789603200,"rid":"99595-v5p57","summary":"Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales, nicht-kommerzielles Publizieren Faires, wissenschaftsgeleitetes Open-Access-Publizieren gewinnt zunehmend an Bedeutung, nicht zuletzt durch die Priorisierungsagenda der BUA-Einrichtungen zur Umsetzung des Open-Science-Leitbilds und das Positionspapier zu Open Research der Berliner Landesinitiative.","tags":["Allgemein","Aktuelles","Berlin","Bibliotheken","Open Access"],"title":"Online Lunch Meeting: Offen und fair Publizieren","updated_at":1789716613,"url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/2026/09/17/online-lunch-meeting-offen-und-fair-publizieren/","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/041qv0h25","name":"Deutsches Arch\u00e4ologisches Institut, Zentrale"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"von Schr\u00f6der","given":"Asta","url":"https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5852-771X"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"d21c5e78-88bc-432c-a20b-4e8a8ead1693","created":1752796800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Wissenslabor f\u00fcr naturwissenschaftliche Sammlungen und objektzentrierte Daten","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/winoda","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/d21c5e78-88bc-432c-a20b-4e8a8ead1693/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://winoda.de/feed/atom/","filter":null,"generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://winoda.de","issn":null,"language":"deu","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"winoda","status":"active","subfield":"1209","title":"WiNoDa Knowledge Lab","updated":1789654043,"use_api":false},"blog_name":"WiNoDa Knowledge Lab","blog_slug":"winoda","content_html":"\n
Was lange w\u00e4hrt, wird endlich gut \u2013 oder so hei\u00dft es.
Mit dem Start des Wintersemesters geht das WiNoDa Knowledge Lab noch einmal richtig in die Vollen: BYOD data clinic am 6. und 9. Oktober 2026, Finale des WiNoDa Hackathon am 14./15. Oktober 2026, WiNoDa Konferenz am 21. Oktober 2026 \u2013 und auch unsere Selbstlernkurse wollen wir noch einmal \"richtig\" gl\u00e4nzen lassen.
Deshalb laden wir alle Interessierten ein, teilzunehmen an unserer WiNoDa Data Expedition: F\u00fcnf Wochen begleitetes Selbststudium rund um Forschungsdaten, Sammlungen und digitale Methoden \u2013 nat\u00fcrlich kostenfrei auf https://moodle.winoda.de/!
Wenn Ihr Euren Lernplan lieber selbst gestalten m\u00f6chtet, aber den Austausch mit anderen nicht missen wollt\u2013 dann ist die WiNoDa Data Expedition genau richtig! Ihr k\u00f6nnt Euch mit den Kursentwicklern austauschen, Eure Fragen stellen und gemeinsam \u00fcberlegen, wie sich das Gelernte konkret anwenden l\u00e4sst. Und Ihr trefft Menschen wieder, denen Ihr vielleicht schon bei einem Webinar oder Workshop begegnet seid\u2013 jetzt habt Ihr endlich Zeit, Euch n\u00e4her kennenzulernen.
\nWir starten alle gemeinsam am
\nDirekt danach beginnt Eure
\n) unsere Kurse absolvieren wollt, bleibt Eurer Entscheidung \u00fcberlassen. F\u00fcr jeden absolvierten Kurs erhaltet Ihr einen Badge und ein Zertifikat.Zum Abschluss treffen wir uns noch einmal alle gemeinsam am
\nAlle unsere Selbstlernkurse sind auf englisch. Die Fertigstellung eines jeden Kurses wird mit einem Zertifikat bescheinigt.
\nDie Registrierung bleibt w\u00e4hrend der gesamten Data Expedition ge\u00f6ffnet \u2013 Nachz\u00fcgler sind jederzeit willkommen!
\nKursangebot","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/w6zk6-8pb65","guid":"https://winoda.de/?p=15680","image":"https://winoda.de/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Data-Expedition.png","language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789603200,"rid":"nbgw5-3tm14","summary":"Was lange w\u00e4hrt, wird endlich gut \u2013 oder so hei\u00dft es.Mit dem Start des Wintersemesters geht das WiNoDa Knowledge Lab noch einmal richtig in die Vollen: BYOD data clinic am [\u2026]","tags":["WiNoDa Knowledge Lab Journal","CfP","Datenkompetenz","FDM","OER"],"title":"Call for Participants: WiNoDa Data Expedition, 01.10.-05.11.2026. F\u00fcnf Wochen begleitetes Selbststudium rund um Forschungsdaten, Sammlungen und digitale Methoden.","updated_at":1789716613,"url":"https://winoda.de/2026/09/17/call-for-participants-winoda-data-expedition-01-10-05-11-2026-fuenf-wochen-begleitetes-selbststudium-rund-um-forschungsdaten-sammlungen-und-digitale-methoden/","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/046ak2485","name":"Freie Universit\u00e4t Berlin"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Fischer","given":"Georg","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5620-5759"}],"blog":{"authors":null,"community_id":"52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2","created":1694476800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":null,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/oaberlin","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/52aefd81-f405-4349-b080-754395a5d8b2/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/feed/atom/","filter":null,"generator":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin","issn":null,"language":"deu","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"oaberlin","status":"active","subfield":"1802","title":"Open Research Blog Berlin","updated":1789648456,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Open Research Blog Berlin","blog_slug":"oaberlin","content_html":"
- RRP - Reusability and its relevance (Basic, ca. 40 minutes)
- RRP - Reusing object-related research data (Basic, ca. 1.5 hours)
- RDM - Core concepts of data quality in research data management (Intermediate, ca. 1,5 hours)
- RDM - Data Governance. Strategies for quality improvement in collection data (Intermediate, ca. 2 hours)
- Regulatory Frameworks for Data Acquisition in Fieldwork (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
- ATR 1 - Introduction: Basic concepts, terminology and workflow of Automatic Text Recognition (ATR) (Basic, ca. 2 hours)
- ATR 2 - Deep Dive: Preprocessing and software selection (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
- ATR 3 \u2013 Deep Dive: Transcription and semantic enrichment (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
- ATR 4 - Deep Dive: Model Training and Publishing (Basic, ca. 1 hour)
Weitere Kurse sind noch in der Entwicklung und werden zu Moodle hinzugef\u00fcgt, sobald sie fertig sind.
Unsere monatliche Rubrik zu aktuellen Veranstaltungen rund um Open Research.
\nAnmerkung zu dieser Rubrik: Das Open Research Office Berlin erstellt monatlich eine \u00dcbersicht \u00fcber Termine und Veranstaltungen zu Open Access und Open Research in Berlin bzw. an Berliner Einrichtungen. Der Fokus liegt dabei auf unseren Partnereinrichtungen und auf Veranstaltungen, die sich an die \u00d6ffentlichkeit richten bzw. die offen sind f\u00fcr Angeh\u00f6rige der Wissenschafts- und Kulturerbeeinrichtungen in Berlin. Wir erg\u00e4nzen diese Liste gerne (Info bitte via Mail ans OROB).\n\n
Wie gehen Einrichtungen des Kulturerbes mit den Zeugnissen der Vergangenheit um? Nutzen sie diese, um bestimmte Sichtweisen historischer Entwicklungen zu st\u00fctzen, oder \u00fcberlassen sie die Bewertung den Nutzenden und erm\u00f6glichen vor allem den Zugang zu den Quellen? W\u00e4hrend Museen mit kuratierten Ausstellungen h\u00e4ufig st\u00e4rker interpretierend arbeiten, verstehen sich Archive und Bibliotheken traditionell eher als Einrichtungen, die sich auf den Zugang zu ihren Best\u00e4nden konzentrieren. Diese Rollenverteilung ger\u00e4t jedoch unter Druck, wenn es um ein schwieriges Erbe \u2013 etwa rassistische oder antisemitische Zeugnisse \u2013 geht: Archive werden kritisiert, wenn sie scheinbar ungefilterten Zugang gew\u00e4hren, w\u00e4hrend zugleich geschichtspolitische Eingriffe in Kulturerbeeinrichtungen kontrovers diskutiert werden.
\n2026 findet die dritte Ausgabe des gro\u00dfen OER-Fachtags von ORCA.nrw statt. Freuen Sie sich \u00fcber den Tag hinweg auf eine spannende Keynote, Projektvorstellungen, Workshops und viel Austausch & Vernetzung!
\nIm Vortrag wird, ankn\u00fcpfend an das Blockchain-Projekt f\u00fcr digitale Zeugnisse, die EUDI-Wallet thematisiert. Die Historie der Entwicklung dieser digitalen Brieftasche auf EU-Ebene wird vorgestellt und die Funktionen und M\u00f6glichkeiten sowie Detailinformationen zur Sicherheit werden erl\u00e4utert. Der aktuelle Stand der Entwicklung wird betrachtet und in Form einer Demo wird die Nutzung an einem konkreten Beispiel veranschaulicht. Nach einem Blick auf zuk\u00fcnftige Entwicklungen im Bereich \"Digitaler Identit\u00e4ten\", wie z. B. Post-Quanten-Verschl\u00fcsselung oder Alternative Biometrische Identifikationsverfahren (AuBi) schlie\u00dft der Abend mit Raum f\u00fcr Diskussionen \u00fcber die Technologie und deren Nutzung.
\nDer Einsatz von KI Technologien erstreckt sich zunehmend auf zentrale Bereiche politischer Steuerung, von der \u00f6ffentlichen Verwaltung und der Umweltpolitik bis hin zu Grenzregimen und wirtschaftlicher Regulierung. Dabei ver\u00e4ndern sie nicht nur Verfahren; es verschieben sich Machtkonstellationen, Verantwortung und politische Handlungsspielr\u00e4ume. Das Symposium mit \u00f6ffentlicher Paneldiskussion diskutiert KI als systemische Herausforderung f\u00fcr Demokratie und Rechtsstaat. Die Veranstaltung bietet kurze Einf\u00fchrungen in verschiedene Schwerpunkte unserer Forschung und erm\u00f6glicht eine kollaborative Plattform zur Diskussion der systemischen Kosten algorithmischer Governance f\u00fcr demokratische Strukturen. Dies schafft einen offenen Raum f\u00fcr Austausch mit politischen Entscheidungstr\u00e4ger*innen, Vertreter*innen von NGOs, Forschenden sowie allen, die an der Zukunft einer digitalen Gesellschaft interessiert sind.
\nDas Digitale ist ein gro\u00dfes Versprechen: Physische R\u00e4ume und pers\u00f6nliche Speichermedien scheinen ganz \u00fcberfl\u00fcssig zu werden, die Cloud soll ortsunabh\u00e4ngigen, schnellen Zugriff und unbegrenzten Speicherplatz erm\u00f6glichen. Aber was kostet das, welche L\u00f6sungen sind sicher und umweltvertr\u00e4glich?\u00a0Gemeinsam mit bestandserhaltenden Einrichtungen und Vertreter:innen aus Wissenschaft und Forschung wollen wir das Versprechen des Digitalen \u00fcberpr\u00fcfen und konstruktive Vorschl\u00e4ge zur longue dur\u00e9e des digitalen Erbes entwickeln. Es sprechen u.v. a.: Frank Scholze (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek), Richard Ovenden (Bodleian Library Oxford) und Petra Gehring (Rat f\u00fcr Informationsinfrastrukturen).
\nDas Open Science Forum Mitteldeutschland 2026 bringt am 5. Oktober Interessierte zu einem offenen Austausch \u00fcber Open Science als Gestaltungsaufgabe zusammen. Wir widmen uns der Frage, welche Rolle wissenschaftsunterst\u00fctzende Einrichtungen spielen, wenn es um neue Ans\u00e4tze in der Forschungsbewertung, nachhaltige Infrastrukturen und digitale Souver\u00e4nit\u00e4t im Spannungsfeld geopolitischer Entwicklungen geht.
\nIn Archiven, Bibliotheken und anderen Ged\u00e4chtniseinrichtungen lagern bundesweit gef\u00e4hrdete Originale, die Meinungsvielfalt, Rechtsordnungen, historische Entwicklungen und politisches Handeln dokumentieren. Der Erhalt dieser \u00dcberlieferungen ist Grundvoraussetzung f\u00fcr eine quellen- und faktenbasierte Forschung, eine historische Aufarbeitung sowie die Sichtbarmachung gesellschaftlicher Mehrstimmigkeit und Diskurse. Originalerhalt ist grundlegender Bestandteil der Informationssicherung und ein wichtiger Beitrag zu einer lebendigen, urteilsf\u00e4higen und wehrhaften Demokratie \u2013 insbesondere angesichts der zunehmenden Bedrohung durch hybride Desinformation und andere demokratiegef\u00e4hrdende Entwicklungen.
\nDie FDM-Sprechstunde Humanities@NFDI ist eine Online-Beratung f\u00fcr Studierende, Forschende oder Mitarbeitende aus Forschungs- und Sammlungsinstitutionen zu allen Fragen rund um das Forschungsdatenmanagement. Expert:innen aus den geisteswissenschaftlichen NFDI-Konsortien NFDI4Memory, NFDI4Culture, NFDI4Objects und Text+ stehen f\u00fcr Ihre Fragen zu allen Themen rund ums Forschungsdatenmanagement bereit. Bei Bedarf k\u00f6nnen Einzelgespr\u00e4che in Breakoutr\u00e4umen vertieft werden.
\nIncreasing consolidation and commercial control over all aspects of knowledge comes at a cost. This year's theme challenges us to consider the financial, human, and environmental costs of creating, sharing, and sustaining knowledge\u2014particularly when these costs are driven by private rather than public interests. Last year's theme of \"Who owns our knowledge?\" reflected on the reality of commercial ownership of knowledge. This year's theme will reckon with the costs of that reality and avenues for reclaiming control of these systems meant to serve the public interest.
\nIn diesem Workshop lernen die Teilnehmenden datenschutzkonforme KI-Anwendungen und Einsatzm\u00f6glichkeiten kennen, die neue Wege f\u00fcr die Nachnutzung von Forschungsdaten erm\u00f6glichen und zur Verbesserung von Datenqualit\u00e4t, Metadatenverf\u00fcgbarkeit und Zug\u00e4nglichkeit beitragen. Mithilfe konkreter Anwendungsf\u00e4lle aus der Forschung werden die rechtssicheren Einsatzm\u00f6glichkeiten der KI im Datenlebenzyklus vorgestellt.
\nFaires, wissenschaftsgeleitetes Open-Access-Publizieren gewinnt zunehmend an Bedeutung, nicht zuletzt durch die Priorisierungsagenda der BUA-Einrichtungen zur Umsetzung des Open-Science-Leitbilds und das Positionspapier zu Open Research der Berliner Landesinitiative. Doch welche Alternativen zu etablierten, oft kommerziellen Publikationswegen gibt es eigentlich, und wie funktionieren sie? In diesem einst\u00fcndigen Lunch Meeting stellen wir Ihnen ausgew\u00e4hlte Orte und Tools f\u00fcr digitales Publizieren vor.
\nDer Workshop f\u00fchrt in die Grundfunktionen von OpenRefine ein und zeigt an konkreten Anwendungsf\u00e4llen, wie Forschende tabellarische Datens\u00e4tze bereinigen, strukturieren und anreichern k\u00f6nnen. Dabei werden auch geskriptete Bearbeitungsschritte sowie der Import und Export verschiedener Datenformate (CSV, XML, JSON) behandelt. OpenRefine erm\u00f6glicht nicht nur einen schnellen \u00dcberblick \u00fcber gro\u00dfe Datens\u00e4tze, sondern hilft vor allem bei heterogenen und historisch gewachsenen Datens\u00e4tze, die oft inkonsistente Metadaten aufweisen.
\nDer Workshop gibt einen \u00dcberblick \u00fcber ELN-Konzepte, zeigt relevante Forschungsdatenmanagement-Aspekte auf und bietet eine praktische Einf\u00fchrung.
\nDer Aktionstag \"Forschungsdaten@BUA\" l\u00e4dt erstmals Forschende der Berlin University Alliance herzlich ein, \u00fcber den Umgang mit Forschungsdaten ins Gespr\u00e4ch zu kommen, sich auszutauschen und zu vernetzen. Ziel ist es, Best Practices sichtbar zu machen, Erfahrungen auszutauschen und den Dialog \u00fcber den Umgang mit Forschungsdaten \u00fcber die vier BUA-H\u00e4user hinweg auszubauen.
\nIm Rahmen dieses Hands-on-Workshops werden Konzepte zum effizienten, reproduzierbaren und nachvollziehbaren Arbeiten mit Forschungsdaten vermittelt. Ziel ist es, die Teilnehmenden mit verschiedenen Werkzeugen vertraut zu machen und das Bewusstsein f\u00fcr Computational Thinking, Automatisierung sowie die Optimierung eigener Arbeitsprozesse zu sch\u00e4rfen.
\nIm Forschungsalltag stehen Forschende regelm\u00e4\u00dfig vor urheberrechtlichen Fragen: Welche Inhalte darf ich in meiner Arbeit verwenden? Unter welchen Bedingungen kann ich Daten und Materialien offen teilen? Wie gehe ich mit KI-Tools und deren Trainingsdaten rechtssicher um? Dieser Workshop bietet praxisnahe Orientierung f\u00fcr den sicheren Umgang mit gesch\u00fctzten Inhalten und Lizenzen in der wissenschaftlichen Arbeit.
\nIn our three-part workshop series, we explore the relationship between the technical aspects, practical applications and critical reflection of the use of AI in research data management. Participants will learn about various AI tools and use cases for research data management, test, and develop criteria for the meaningful and responsible use of AI in their own work.
\nweiter zu November 2026 [in K\u00fcrze]
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/pzvzm-f9w08","guid":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/?p=4297","language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1788220800,"rid":"208kg-aed59","summary":"Unsere monatliche Rubrik zu aktuellen Veranstaltungen rund um Open Research. Anmerkung zu dieser Rubrik: Das Open Research Office Berlin erstellt monatlich eine \u00dcbersicht \u00fcber Termine und Veranstaltungen zu Open Access und Open Research in Berlin bzw. an Berliner Einrichtungen.","tags":["Veranstaltungshinweise"],"title":"Veranstaltungshinweise Oktober 2026","updated_at":1789716611,"url":"https://blogs.fu-berlin.de/open-research-berlin/2026/09/01/veranstaltungshinweise-oktober-2026/","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/0153tk833","name":"University of Virginia"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Turner","given":"Stephen","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9140-9028"}],"blog":{"authors":[{"name":"Stephen Turner"}],"community_id":"382941a7-2ffa-41df-8bbb-5f772188517f","created":1780876800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"A practicing data scientist's take on AI, genomics, biosecurity, and the ways AI is reshaping how science gets done. Weekly updates from the field. Occasional notes on programming.","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/stephenturner","favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/382941a7-2ffa-41df-8bbb-5f772188517f/logo","feed_format":"application/rss+xml","feed_url":"https://blog.stephenturner.us/feed","filter":null,"generator":"Substack","home_page_url":"https://blog.stephenturner.us","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":"10.59350","relative_url":null,"secure":true,"slug":"stephenturner","status":"active","subfield":"1311","title":"Paired Ends","updated":1789660630,"use_api":true},"blog_name":"Paired Ends","blog_slug":"stephenturner","content_html":"I'm starting a large biosecurity research program that I'll write about here soon that combines human subjects research, AI development and engineering, and policy. I've never had any formal training or experience in biotechnology policy, but after spending some time at last weekend's Global Challenges Project biosecurity meeting and meeting with NSCEB this week I'm starting to really try to connect the technical work we're doing here with what could be tangible policy recommendations and action. After all, we can publish all the whitepapers and journal articles we want, but if it never has a real-world impact and doesn't move the needle on biosecurity and AI safety policy, you'd be correct to question the value of doing the research in the first place. Thankfully, I have really stellar partners in our National Security Data and Policy Institute who are close collaborators with me and my colleagues here in SDS on this project. More soon, I promise.
There was a story in Politico this week reporting that OpenAI endorsed a set of bills in response to AI biothreats. All of them came out of the recommendations from last year's final report from the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology (NSCEB). They were written in part to fix a data problem: biological data sits in incompatible formats across dozens of repositories, and getting it into shape for AI training takes months of work per project.
Here are the three bills in question:
SCALE Biology would create a biometrology program at NIST, authorized at $55M in FY2026 rising to $85M by FY2030, covering measurement standards for engineering biology and biomanufacturing. Biorisk, biosafety, and biosecurity standards are item (E) in a 9-item list of program activities.
(c) Activities.\u2014In carrying out the biometrology laboratory program, the Director shall carry out the following:
[\u2026]
(E) The development of technical standards, guidelines, best practices, methodologies, procedures, and processes that can inform and address biorisk, biosafety, and biosecurity concerns.
The AI-Ready Bio-Data Standards Act gives NIST two years to define what \"AI-ready\" means for a biological dataset (See also: NSF 26-512) and to set minimum requirements for federally funded research that generates biological data, instructing that those requirements not exceed the resources grantees actually have.
(ii) REQUIREMENTS FOR DEFINITION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-READY.\u2014
(I) IN GENERAL.\u2014In facilitating the establishment of the definition of the term \"artificial intelligence-ready\" under clause (i)(I), the Director shall take such actions as may be necessary to ensure such definition, when applied to a biological dataset, requires such dataset be generated and formatted in a manner that\u2014
(aa) enables the effective use of the dataset for training artificial intelligence models; and
(bb) supports advancements in research relating to artificial intelligence and biotechnology.
The Web of Biological Data Act has DOE competitively award a national lab the job of building a single entry point to federal biological data.
(2) CONTENTS.\u2014The Web shall\u2014
(A) serve as a single point of entry for researchers to access different sources of biological data, especially those funded by the Federal Government, by directly hosting data or providing access to existing databases;
(B) have metrics and metadata to indicate data quality, including usability, interoperability, and completeness; and
(C) include tiered levels of cybersecurity safeguards and access controls to protect different types of biological data assets hosted in or connected to the Web.
Richard Johnson, who runs national security risk mitigation at OpenAI, said that data and standards are prerequisites for measuring how model capability bears on biosecurity.
We need to be worried both about the safety and the risk side, but we also need to be looking at the opportunities for getting the tools into the hands of the defenders.
A single well-documented entry point to federal biological data helps everyone, including the foreign actors Anthropic caught using its models for pathogen work this year.
The Web of Biological Data bill requires tiered cybersecurity safeguards and access controls scaled to data sensitivity, an independent assessment of those controls every two years, and an advisory board with at least one biosecurity expert. It doesn't say how a dataset gets assigned to a tier.
Caitlin Frazer, executive director of the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology (a congressionally established body that is also supporting the bills) also provided commentary for the article.
High-quality, AI-ready biological data must be treated like a strategic national resource.
It absolutely must be. I couldn't agree more.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/2a585-hwx09","guid":"216168232","image":"https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!pP50!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F0915558e-5ffb-4e52-8352-513c9d7ec745_1200x630.png","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","published_at":1789603200,"rid":"e4hqy-xsh46","summary":"Standardizing federal biological data to maintain US competitiveness in AI and biotechnology","tags":["Biosecurity","AI"],"title":"Three biological data bills, with OpenAI support","updated_at":1789716610,"url":"https://blog.stephenturner.us/p/biodata-bills-nsceb","version":"v1"},{"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/027xymc69","name":"Agence Bibliographique de l'Enseignement Sup\u00e9rieur"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Melzac","given":"Carole","url":"https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1446-079X"},{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Riquelme","given":"Carlos"}],"blog":{"authors":[{"name":"ROR Team"}],"community_id":"c709442a-2058-4f0b-9c81-5199efd7b9e0","created":1780876800,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"The Research Organization Registry (ROR) is a global, community-led registry of open persistent identifiers for research and funding organizations.","doi":null,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/c709442a-2058-4f0b-9c81-5199efd7b9e0/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://ror.org/feed.xml","filter":null,"generator":"Hugo","home_page_url":"https://ror.org/","issn":null,"language":"eng","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","prefix":null,"relative_url":null,"secure":null,"slug":"ror","status":"active","subfield":"1710","title":"Research Organization Registry (ROR)","updated":1789658423,"use_api":null},"blog_name":"Research Organization Registry (ROR)","blog_slug":"ror","content_html":"\nFrance's Bibliographic Agency for Higher Education and Research (ABES) explains how and why thousands of French dissertations are so well-described in Crossref DOI metadata with ROR IDs and more.
\nA French version of this post is available on the ABES blog. Many thanks to Carlos Riquelme for assistance with English translation.
\nABES stands for Agence bibliographique de l'enseignement sup\u00e9rieur (Bibliographic Agency for Higher Education and Research)1 and was created in 1994 as a public body. Its initial goal was to create a national union catalogue for all university libraries in France, based on shared cataloguing, known as Sudoc (Syst\u00e8me Universitaire de Documentation). A particular emphasis was then placed on managing PhD theses, as ABES became in charge of the legal deposit of all doctoral dissertations defended in France with a nationwide statutory mandate; not only are they present in the Sudoc, but they are described in a rich metadata model (TEF, details in French on the ABES website) using software developed in-house by ABES and made available through a dedicated portal: theses.fr.
\nThe tracking and identification of French PhD theses started in 1985 by assigning an identifier called NNT (Num\u00e9ro National de Th\u00e8se). The NNT combines 3 parts of 4 characters: the first is the year, the second is a code for the institution that grants the diploma and the last sequence is attributed by the organisation on a unique basis, mostly incrementally.
\nStructure of the French Num\u00e9ro National de Th\u00e8se.
\nA URI for each French thesis can be built using the prefix theses.fr/ and adding the NNT; highlighting ABES' early concern about promoting identifiers and Open Science. The URI for this thesis is https://theses.fr/2026SORUL032.
As has been the case across many other countries, a national strategy for open science and the adoption of persistent identifiers has been put in place in France. The French ministry for higher education and research in its effort to promote PIDs entrusted ABES with a project to assign Crossref Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) to all French doctoral dissertations, with two major goals:
\nEnhance digital preservation by relying on a robust, well-established international identifier schema such as the DOI
\nBuild on and benefit from Crossref infrastructure and presence in the ecosystem.
\nThe project was kicked off in 2025 with an ABES team with Carlos Riquelme as Product Owner. The Crossref metadata schema (now at version 5.5) is not as tailored for detailed description of theses as the TEF format that includes subject indexing and peculiar relationships such as jury [dissertation committee] members. And Crossref only accepts the cr\u00e8me de la cr\u00e8me as PIDs: ORCID for individuals and ROR for organisations, which are not natively present in the thesis metadata because theses are described using ABES' own reference database, called IdRef. Derived from the authority file of our good old Sudoc, IdRef underpins several bibliographic databases, including theses.fr, but also library catalogs in French-speaking countries in Europe (University of Li\u00e8ge in Belgium; Swiss networks RERO, Renouvaud, and SLSP) and publishers (Cairn, OpenEdition). IdRef is used as a source of trusted data for individual contributors, organisations, and key concepts.
\nHow did ORCID and ROR IDs make their way into IdRef data? No magic \u2013 it is the result of the combined effort of a distributed network of 3,000+ catalogers feeding into the databases (Sudoc, theses.fr, and so on), and a centralized coordination by ABES.
\nRegarding ORCID, the longstanding relationship started with a Memorandum of Understanding in 2016. Alongside co-leading the French ORCID consortium together with Couperin, ABES focused on the gigantic data dump provided yearly by ORCID, aiming to scrutinize French adoption of the most prominent PIDs for individual contributors, and matching ORCIDs to IdRef IDs based on algorithm analyzing co-authorship. In September 2026, almost 195,000 IdRef records carry an ORCID as an external identifier \u2013 and this is 18% more than the previous year. Toggling from an IdRef record to an ORCID is seamless: a micro API designed as https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2orcid/[idref] gives an instant result, as in the example below:
IdRef markup with an ORCID ID. https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2orcid/150117671
\nIt is exactly the same process to jump from an IdRef to a ROR ID, this time using the micro API https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2ror/[idref], as in the example below:
IdRef markup with a ROR ID. https://www.idref.fr/services/idref2ror/033702462
\nMaintaining the matching between IdRef and ROR is dead easy for this use case, as there are only 220 research organisations involved. Some of them change, as the French higher education and research landscape has been rather dynamic those past 15 years, with constant mergers and legal status changes. Fortunately ABES relies on local librarians to track those changes. Again, for all IdRef records (including labs and other facilities) the matching with ROR is the result of aggregate efforts of our invaluable network of librarians on top of the centralized action that ran modestly during 2021-2024 (more details in French on the ABES blog). The matching for organisations associated with PhD theses, due to the small volume, has involved a good bit of manual work, allowing human eyes to do careful checking.
\nAs always, a huge thank you to ROR curation team, and especially Adam Buttrick, for all the help along the way!
\nIt's worth pointing out that, although ROR and ORCID are \"recommended\" by Crossref, at ABES we decided to go the extra mile and make ROR IDs part of our mandatory metadata when registering DOIs. As a result, ROR IDs are now included, and ORCIDs whenever available, in every DOI deposit for a PhD thesis in France.
\nAlmost 180,000 Crossref DOIs have been registered for back-year PhD theses in April 2026, and this does explain the sudden appearance of ABES at the top of the list of organisations registering ROR in Crossref metadata. But DOI registration is now an ongoing process for French PhD theses, and we expect around 10-13,000 to be added each year. We're going up, up, up \u2013 it's our moment! \ud83d\ude09
\nHaving ORCID and ROR IDs in French PhD theses' metadata spread over the world thanks to Crossref's robust infrastructure should enhance French research's visibility: today, 33,000+ ORCID profiles have been updated with the PhD thesis as a Work, due to researchers' accepted delegation to Crossref. The whole process shows the pivotal role of national PIDs such as IdRef to connect local knowledge and international science, in line with the seminal white paper by Morebrain: It's \"ORCID and\u2026\" , not \"ORCID or\u2026\".
\nThere are 3 candidates in ROR searching for \"ABES\", the two other located in India and Pakistan. \ud83d\ude09\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e
\n![\"the](\"https://tzovar.as/assets/images/2026-09-16-digital-solidarity.jpg\")
\n