Post #3096733

2025-09-04 08:17 UTC

@neuralreckoning@neuromatch.social @brembs@mastodon.social @crazyeddie@mastodon.social Knowing a bit about how relatively tricky it has been to build consensus over the expansion (case in point, missing UK participation, for example), and how large the technical and governance challenges will be to implement it, I think it is not realistic to expect for it to evolve into something so much beyond it’s intended purpose for the funders who foot the bill – at least not for the near-to-mid-term future. Sorry to pour some cold water on this but I think this discussion is confusing what these changes are about and what they are not.

Replies (2)

@mostlyphysics@fediscience.org 2025-09-04 08:23

@neuralreckoning@neuromatch.social @brembs@mastodon.social @crazyeddie@mastodon.social Nothing I have seen or heard suggests there is any motivation for ORE to host anything that hasn’t been submitted there. Maybe the open infrastructure that is being built will enable that in the future, and maaaaaybe the funders will come to see their duty as providing a universal infrastructure for publicly funded research along the lines of Björn’s vision, but that is not what we are (or should be) discussing with the coming changes.

Open ##3096734
@crazyeddie@mastodon.social 2025-09-04 17:42

@mostlyphysics@fediscience.org @neuralreckoning@neuromatch.social @brembs@mastodon.social It looks to me like it chose a lot of the right technologies to implement on. It'll play well with others that do similar things and serve as a nice host to these 'federated' protocols. It's good to see because as far as I know the current method is to get a doi and then point it at some random url where your document will be. That's got all kinds of weaknesses for things that should stick around.

Open ##3096739