Archive for July, 2010

Plagiarism as a spectrum

Monday, July 26th, 2010

cheating on a testLast week, fresh in the wake of the digital hurricane that was PepsiGate, science writer Brian Switek saw a funny thing: what appeared to be part of his story on a website he had never written for.

On July 16, Smithsonian.com ran a piece Switek wrote about dinosaurs that snacked on unfortunate burrowing mammals (with cool skeleton-in-the-stomach fossils to boot). As is common in the competitive science news industry, some other outlet — Tom Feilden’s blog at the BBC in this case — eventually posted a similar piece.

But according to Switek and many others, the wording in the BBC’s post looked a bit too similar.

Switek pointed out this curiosity in the article’s comments section, eventually announcing “slimy” behavior on Twitter. Allegations of  plagiarism ensued, and Charlie Petit of Knight Science Journalism Tracker played referee. (more…)

What IS this bug?

Wednesday, July 14th, 2010

praying mantis leaf insect, Phyllium bioculatumOne of my favorite courses in college was Entomology 500. The gist: Capture a crapload of bugs, mount them on pins, identify them to a species, and finally show to them off for reactions of a) abject horror or b) nerdly squeals of delight.

As much as I’d like to personally identify your mystery bug(s) for you, there’s a better way: The Internet! (What else did you expect?)

Below are some free services to which you can submit creepy crawly bug photos, and a trained expert will respond with their best identification:

  • PestControlCanada.com – A straightforward site where the curious send in their photos, and volunteer bug pros respond in a few days. Not geared for the kill-nothing Buddhist types (i.e. “pest control” in the URL), but they do have a simple setup with nice-sized images.*
  • WhatsThatBug.com – More verbose identifications than the previous site, but the concept is the same: email your bugs, get them looked at. One big difference, however, is the “Why you gotta hate on insects?” attitude, as evidenced by the “Unnecessary Carnage” section that scolds bug squashers.
  • University of Minnesota’s insect gallery – If you’re too impatient for a pro’s analysis, this is a convenient self-guided process-of-elimination tool. Trouble is, there’s only a handful of bugs — but to turn it around again, the ones you’d most commonly notice/encounter are listed. A nice start before throwing in the towel.
  • Aardvark – To get a little social media on you, Vark.com is a great service to answer tough-to-Google questions — like “what is this bug?” This is because living breathing people (including entomologists and other bug experts) are on standby to answer strangers’ questions. You’ll need an instant message program and a means to post your photos publicly, but it’s a near-instant setup.

Speaking of ID’ing animals, it’s time for a few words on species. (more…)

Photos: Manhattanhenge

Sunday, July 11th, 2010

Manhattanhenge 2010 sunset silhouetteManhattan’s streets are aligned on a wonderfully regular grid, a relief to perfectionist types out there who crave order in their arrangement of asphalt.

But it ain’t perfect, and I’m not talking about downtown’s quagmire of back streets.

As it turns out, New York City’s grid is slightly skewed in a clockwise direction because, well… it makes more sense given the shape and direction of “Mannahatta.”

Cartographers often fool the foolhardy, however, by rotating streets into a more aesthetically pleasing arrangement (to agree with a map’s rectangular shape). Don’t believe me? Look for the compass on MTA’s subway map. It’s hanging out in the Long Island Sound.

Anyway, this regularity that’s a wee bit off creates not one but two golden opportunities — arguably four, if you like seeing half our backyard star — for photography and astronomy nerds.

(more…)

ScienceBlogs + PepsiCo: Are we overreacting?

Wednesday, July 7th, 2010

Update 1 (7/8/2010): I’ve had some time to “chew on the gray area,”and Martin Robbins’ most excellent post on “Pepsigate” certainly helped (via David Dobbs). In short, I agree with Robbins’ argument and potential solutions. However, I’m still left wondering the following: Why wasn’t such a colossal stink about corporate-sponsored blogs previously raised by the community? Again, I admittedly lack the inside perspective because I’m not a ScienceBlogs member. Some of these sponsored blogs appear to be editorially independent, but full transparency is publicly elusive.

Update 2 (7/8/2010): ScienceBlogs has shuttered Food Frontiers and officially opened this issue up for debate, which pads the fair ounce of credit I think they deserve. Is this, however, a case of “a day late, a dollar short”? Yes, and rightfully so for those who left — especially the journalist-bloggers (i.e. David Dobbs, Maryn McKenna, Rebecca Skloot, etc.). But I’m an optimist. Perhaps management at Seed can truly learn from this experience, address the major problems that permitted the business operation to tarnish the editorial operation, and salvage their hemorrhaging community.


If you’ve been living under a science blogging rock, head over to Carl Zimmer’s summary of the ScienceBlogs and PepsiCo kerfuffle.

Didn’t get all that? Here’s a capsule review of the past 24+ hours:

  1. The 8,000,000-pound corporate gorilla PepsiCo struck a deal with Seed Media Group to join ScienceBlogs
  2. “Food Frontiers,” as the new blog is called, started with an introductory post by Evan Lerner
  3. The science blogosphere threw a conniption, with the majority* saying: “WTF is going on here?”
  4. In protest, some ScienceBloggers decided to vacate the premises (some temporarily, some permanently)
  5. ScienceBlogs finally added disclaimers about the nature of the PepsiCo relationship, i.e. that it’s “advertorial”
  6. News outlets (e.g. The Guardian) ran pieces about the fiasco
  7. When it’s a little too late, Adam Bly — founder and CEO of Seed — sent this letter to the ScienceBloggers
  8. (welcome to the present)

Pepsi Cola sign by Whiskeygonebad/FlickrIn short, ScienceBlogs — for various reasons — pissed off a lot of people.

But are we all overreacting over a communications oversight here? Or is this a legitimate, fist-slamming-on-the-desk moment to stick up to The Man?

Or perhaps a bit of both? (more…)

Revisit: Human v2.0

Friday, July 2nd, 2010

BBC Human v2.0Last month I pounded out a post about the implications of our seemingly inevitable immortality — when man becomes machine, or machine becomes man.

Sounds silly, but myself and expert technologists are dead-serious about that “inevitable” part.

Probably not within our lifetime (if you’re reading this in 2010), though. I’d wager at least one future generation or, even likelier, a couple of generations down the crazy road of technology.
Unless you’re as optimistic as Ray Kurzweil.

This is all to admit my ignorance: When I wrote that, I had no idea the BBC produced a fantastic show called Human v2.0 a few years ago.

The sub-1-hour special taps into the minds of visionaries and scientists alike who wake up and go to bed thinking about this stuff. When they do sleep, of course. (more…)