{
  "version": "https://jsonfeed.org/version/1.1",
  "title": "chem-bla-ics",
  "description": "Chemblaics (pronounced chem-bla-ics) is the science that uses open science and computers to solve problems in chemistry, biochemistry and related fields.",
  "home_page_url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/",
  "feed_url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/2026/02/08/open-infrastructures.json",
  "icon": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/assets/images/chem-bla-ics_logo.png",
  "language": "en",
  "authors": [
    {
      "name": "Egon Willighagen",
      "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286",
      "_orcid": "0000-0001-7542-0286"
    }
  ],
  "items": [

    {
      "id": "https://doi.org/10.59350/1ja9h-jem83",
      "url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/2026/02/08/open-infrastructures.html",
      "title": "Open Infrastructures #2: the SURF Fediverse",
      "content_html": "<p>When I first started writing this post, I started writing up why scientific communication is important, but because I started\nexplaining what needs improving, and what are underlying causes why change is not happening, it got dark pretty quickly. So,\nI deleted that essay again. Instead, let’s just enjoy the awesome and long list of solutions we have for scientific discourse.\nReaders of my blog can find many posts in the past 20 years about the diversification.\nOne thing I will say before I move one, is a reply to the argument that journal-based peer review is essential to the\nquality of research: if the quality of your research is dependent on your peers, then please rethink why you are doing research.</p>\n\n<p>Now, about the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse\">fediverse</a>…</p>\n\n<h2 id=\"mastodon-service-by-surf\">Mastodon (service by SURF)</h2>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(social_network)\">Mastodon</a> is one of the more well-known corners of the fediverse,\nand I <a href=\"https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/tag/mastodon\">blogged about it before</a>.\nIt is intrinsically open, while it has extensive options to make things more private. It is like Twitter but then without the\ncentral control. It is unlike Slack, <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zulip\">Zulip</a>, and LinkedIn which has clear walls around communities.\nIt also is unlike past efforts like Google Wave and <a href=\"https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/tag/friendfeed\">FriendFeed</a>\nwhich created much more structured discourse.</p>\n\n<p>But I enjoy Mastodon. It has all the good science, the friendly, helpful people, and I have many options to block people,\nfediverse servers, and even individual keywords (you can remove anything “PFAS”, for example, something hard in the real world).\nBut you also have linear timeline, with just content of the people you follow.</p>\n\n<p>And, with the <a href=\"http://surf.nl/\">SURF</a> <a href=\"https://social.edu.nl/\">social.edu.nl</a> server, every researcher from a SURF-linked\nresearch insitute can get an account there via <a href=\"https://www.surf.nl/en/services/identity-access-management/surfconext\">SURFconext</a>\n(the Mastodon solution may need to be activited by your institute first; if so, ask your institute ICT to enable it).\nThe list of accounts on this SURF Mastodon server shows <a href=\"https://social.edu.nl/directory?order=active\">a veried list of people and organisations</a>,\nbut you can also check this list of <a href=\"https://communities.surf.nl/publieke-waarden/artikel/80-ways-to-follow-research-science-and-education-on-mastodon\">80 Ways to follow Research, Science and Education on Mastodon</a>.\nOr <a href=\"https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/2022/11/21/finding-mastodon-accounts-with-wikidata.html\">this list of Wikidata queries</a>.</p>\n\n<p>I think every organization that communicates their research should have at least one open world communication channel,\nand if they then like to keep their wall-garden LinkedIn account too, that is fine. But societal impact for just a select group\nof people feels a bit awkward to me.</p>\n\n<h2 id=\"peertube-service-by-surf\">PeerTube (service by SURF)</h2>\n\n<p>But SURF operates a second fediverse server, one using the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PeerTube\">PeerTube</a> software, also\nextended with the SURFconext interoperability. PeerTube is a platform to share videos, like YouTube.\nJust before the winter holiday, I got the opportunity to create two project accounts on SURF’s <a href=\"https://video.edu.nl/\">video.edu.nl</a>,\none for the <a href=\"https://vhp4safety.nl/\">VHP4Safety</a> project and one for the <a href=\"https://tdcc.nl/projects/tdcc-nes-projects/fair4chemnl-accelerating-the-adoption-of-universal-data-standards-in-chemistry/\">FAIR4ChemNL</a>\nproject.</p>\n\n<p>The cool thing actually is that SURFconext has group accounts via <a href=\"https://servicedesk.surf.nl/wiki/spaces/IAM/pages/92668196/SURFconext+Invite+EN\">SURFconext Invite</a>\n(it was earlier called <em>SURFconext Teams</em>), so these two PeerTube channels are operated by two or more\npeople from the project, and the two videos that are now available, have not actually been uploaded by me.</p>\n\n<p>But I am very excited we now have channels to share our video communication, <a href=\"https://video.edu.nl/a/vhp4safety/videos\">here for VHP4Safety</a>:</p>\n\n<p><img src=\"/assets/images/peertube_vhp4safety.png\" alt=\"\" /></p>\n\n<p>And <a href=\"https://video.edu.nl/a/fair4chemnl/videos\">here for FAIR4ChemNL</a>:</p>\n\n<p><img src=\"/assets/images/peertube_fair4chemnl.png\" alt=\"\" /></p>\n\n<!-- Communication infrastructure behind the world wide web has been open infrastructure for a long time, including email, the web itself,\nand internet relay chat. Early commercial alternatives, like Compuserve and AOL, created walled gardens using unique information, quite like\nNetflix, HBO, and AppleTV do now. While these disappeared, the commercial need for walls is deep rooted in the Western culture.\nAnd the walled gardens won in the end. The do for streaming, for searching, and increasingly for communication. The latter, of course,\nis causing a lot of social problems, by controlling who can say what to whom. And being operated by huge interantional companies, the\noften operate outside law. Even the European Commissions cannot keep them within legal limits.\n\nIt is essential to realize this affects the research community hard. The publishing industry is largely a walled garden: it was\nbefore open access and with APC-that-come-with-30-percent-profit as the norm the walls have not really dropped. If you prefer to\ntalk about the peer review walls, the walls exist just as well: who can do peer review (is allowed inside the wall), who decides\nwhich peer reviewers are important (who gets thrown outside the wall), and why post-publication peer review is not a thing\n(only thing inside the wall matter). The walls, unfortunately, are often based on good looks (like journal impact factor,\nthe label \"American\" or \"Society\") and discussions about quality are mostly pushed outside the wall.\n\nYet, communication is a central activity in doing research, and open communication channels are to me an essential part\nof that. If the discussion of good science is limited to those in power, this can only harm science. Of course, retractions are\nrare, fraud even more, and any correlation with anything cannot happen inside the walls (until it does).\nUnfortunately, until we can untangle the notion of peer review from prestige, power, and money, it will not easily change. -->",
      "summary": "When I first started writing this post, I started writing up why scientific communication is important, but because I started explaining what needs improving, and what are underlying causes why change is not happening, it got dark pretty quickly. So, I deleted that essay again. Instead, let’s just enjoy the awesome and long list of solutions we have for scientific discourse. Readers of my blog can find many posts in the past 20 years about the diversification. One thing I will say before I move one, is a reply to the argument that journal-based peer review is essential to the quality of research: if the quality of your research is dependent on your peers, then please rethink why you are doing research.",
      "image": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/assets/images/peertube_fair4chemnl.png",
      "date_published": "2026-02-08T00:00:00+00:00",
      "date_modified": "2026-02-08T00:00:00+00:00",
      "tags": ["mastodon","peertube","vhp4safety","fair4chemnl"],
      
      
      
      "_funding": [{"award": { "title" : "The Virtual Human Platform for Safety Assessment", "acronym" : "VHP4Safety", "uri" : "drc.filenumber:nwa129219272" }, "funder": { "name": "Dutch Research Council", "ror": "04jsz6e67" } },{"award": { "title" : "FAIR4ChemNL: Accelerating the adoption of universal data standards in chemistry", "acronym" : "FAIR4ChemNL", "uri" : "doi:10.61686/XVYQV45374" }, "funder": { "name": "Dutch Research Council", "ror": "04jsz6e67" } }],
      
      
        "authors": [ { "name": "Egon Willighagen", "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286" } ]
      
    }

  ]
}