Prior to our arrival at the Science at Risk meeting, we were asked to answer some questions that would be used in context at the meeting and in subsequent reports. Here are the questions with my responses:

Value of Content: 50 years from now, what kinds of online science content will invaluable for understanding science in our age? Please give an example of a particular piece of content and explain why it would be significant. Feel free to provide several examples if you wish.

Right now, most of the online content is in the form of blog posts which is more or less outreach for the general public and other scientists. This content would be useful to those in the future to get a general feel of what was being done at this time. Another major aspect of science today is the push for open research, data, and protocols. There are tons of blog posts related to these topics most of which are propogated by current technological organizations (Figshare.com, BenchFly.com, etc). And then there are those who pursue their research online in real-time, those that undertake open notebook science (research.iheartanthony.com). This information would be useful in the future for those to see exactly how science was performed at this age.

Future Use of Content: What kinds of uses do you imagine this science content could serve? Please briefly describe the value that you think online science content provides for the future. Ideally, focus on specific kinds of content and explain what value that content provides to different types of users (ex, future scientists, historians, policy makers, etc).

In the case of open notebook science, methods, and data are posted and maintained. In the future (if archived) no one would ever have to toil over the intricacies of repeating an experiment because all the details would be described in full in the original notebook which those in the future would have full access to. Policy makers would have direct access to research and could better plan and prepare around the needs of current/future scientists because they have direct access to the needs of those scientists. Historians would accurately be able to record scientific culture if data is not lost. And members of the public would have an unprecedented account of scientific data across time.

Identifying Curatorial Homes: Libraries, Archives and Museums have typically collected published works (like journals and books) unpublished works (like the papers of scientists) and a range of other special collections (everything from collections of specimens, to laboratory equipment, to a range of other artifacts). Where are the natural curatorial homes for various kinds of online science content?

I think there should be one organizational hub for online science content, with university libraries being the main curatorial home for this content. Online content should be maintained by the university that is the home to that content, and in an effort to make that curation easier, universities should provide the space to house the content. In the event that online scientific content is performed externally, the institution that creates that content should maintain the content. But like I said first, there should be one body that oversees all that content and I can’t see any better resource than the Library of Congress.