From owner-chemistry |-at-| ccl.net Mon Oct 17 21:13:00 2011
From: "Mark Zottola mzottola{=}gmail.com" <owner-chemistry|,|server.ccl.net>
To: CCL
Subject: CCL: Science code manifesto
Message-Id: <-45672-111017210917-30523-ZlLG8+3i/zkcc2q/4Rt7GQ|,|server.ccl.net>
X-Original-From: Mark Zottola <mzottola*gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec544ec58f25e6004af885e4a
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:09:10 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0


Sent to CCL by: Mark Zottola [mzottola::gmail.com]
--bcaec544ec58f25e6004af885e4a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

For all our concerns about the impact of this manifesto on science, I think
most are missing what I believe to be an important aspect.  If a code is
readily available for the scientific public, then it is readily available to
the general public.  As one area mentioned in the manifesto was climate
modeling, it is clear that enterprising non-scientists or muck-raking types
can access these codes.

In any well-commented code, there are bound to comments like "applying the
Fandoozie trick" or other such innocucous statements.  In addition, in any
code of over 1000 lines there are bound to be bugs.  Can you imagine the
public discourse when some rabel-rouser claims the software for climate
modeling is flawed and he shows the offending code as "proof".  Flaws and
"tricks", common to all software, have the potential to be exploited for
political gain under this manifesto.

I'm not sure where the middle ground is when trying to make software open,
accessible, and maintaining peer review without the introduction of
politics.  I think this needs a lot more thought and consideration.

Mark Zottola

--bcaec544ec58f25e6004af885e4a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div>For all our concerns about the impact of this manifesto on science, I =
think most are missing what I believe to be an important aspect.=A0 If a co=
de is readily available for the scientific public, then it is readily avail=
able to the general public.=A0 As one area mentioned in the manifesto was c=
limate modeling, it is clear that enterprising non-scientists or muck-rakin=
g types can access these codes.</div>
<div>=A0</div><div>In any well-commented code, there are bound to comments =
like &quot;applying the Fandoozie trick&quot; or other such innocucous stat=
ements.=A0 In addition, in any code of over 1000 lines there are bound to b=
e bugs.=A0 Can you imagine the public discourse when some rabel-rouser clai=
ms the software for climate modeling is flawed and he shows the offending c=
ode as &quot;proof&quot;.=A0 Flaws and &quot;tricks&quot;, common to all so=
ftware, have the potential to be exploited for political gain under this ma=
nifesto.</div>
<div>=A0</div><div>I&#39;m not sure where the middle ground is when trying =
to make software open, accessible, and maintaining peer review without the =
introduction of politics.=A0 I think this needs a lot more thought and cons=
ideration.<br>
<br></div><div>Mark Zottola</div>

--bcaec544ec58f25e6004af885e4a--