kristoff@genbank.BIO.NET (David Kristofferson) (03/15/90)
Leslie, While I pointed out the advantages of USENET software in an earlier posting I do not deny that it is yet another piece of software to learn. However, if one only learns how to use a mail program (of which there are many that are pretty simple to use), one can participate in the BIOSCI newsgroups simply by sending in one's address to get on our distribution list and by mailing one's postings to the newsgroup. This generally does not entail much more than knowing how to start the mail program, how to read a message, how to type in "send" followed by the newsgroup address, and then compose one's message. I think that virtually all biologists can handle this, and those who can't probably wouldn't be interested in an informatics discussion anyway. Reading the postings through USENET, however, does involve learning yet another program besides mail. Regarding the ease of use of the news software, that can vary from site to site. For the GenBank On-line Service (GOS) system, we emphasize vnews but also provide rn and readnews. The GOS user manual is designed to walk a user through vnews. I agree that the interface needs improvement, but I also believe that it can be learned by anyone who is willing to invest about half an hour to read through the chapter in our manual and try things out on GOS. If your systems staff simply puts up a piece of software on your computer and then merely says," Here it is ... good luck, sucker!" then I would get after them to do their job! I find it curious that after teaching probably a dozen people how to use an electronic microscope during my lab days, the same group might approach something like vnews with greater hesitation even though proper operation of the microscope was much more involved. There was always an initial suspicion about the use of electronic mail on behalf of users who were new to the BIONET Resource (R.I.P.), but I knew many who, after they actually tried it, found out that it really wasn't as hard as they had feared after all. Too many people still recall struggling with computers for hours at some point in the past to accomplish a job which they could have done manually in minutes. This memory prevents too many from wanting to get involved again. Fortunately things have changed dramatically since the days of punch cards! Nonetheless I think that it would be a very worthwhile project as part of the Genome Project for NIH/DOE to help fund the development of a public domain newsreader that was as simple to use as it is to fall off a log. This could greatly facilitate communications between the various Centers that are planned. So far I have not had much luck in getting anyone at NIH excited about this yet, probably because it is not exclusively a biology problem. Doug Brutlag at Stanford told me just the other day that there now is a version of USENET news software which runs on a Mac, but I haven't seen it yet and so cannot comment on its ease of use. (Doug, care to join in?) If it is a class job, maybe this need has been or is about to be filled. -- Sincerely, Dave Kristofferson GenBank On-line Service Manager kristoff@genbank.bio.net
dow@largo.ig.com (Christopher Dow) (03/17/90)
In article <9003141547.AA06600@apldbio.com>, ldow@apldbio.com (Leslie Johnston-Dow) writes: > And I do agree. However, it is naieve to think that the basically > non-electronic community of biologists will be able to make effective > use of the electronic newsgroups without a great deal of help. > > Now for my humble proposal :-) > I believe it would be valuable if the biology comunity were initially > contacted through journals, for example BioTechniques would be perfect. > A series of articles could be written outlining the availablity and (most > importantly) the day to day uses of Bionet. These articles could allow > an average biologist the initial information to subscribe to and use > Bionet presented in a forum that they readily use and understand. > Now, I am NOT criticizing Dave,the Bionet management, or community! > I think everyone has done a fine job disseminating information, but in > my experience the scope is far too limited. I am aware that theres have been > publications concerning this issue, but in my experience the biology > community is not readily aware of them. So lets get 'em where they > live! I agree that we Bionet should be used as a source input from the scientific community, and also the Bionet in general should be used by more people. There is, however, a very real problem with getting on a computer and acutally doing it. Some ways to reduce the engergy barrier would be more information on not just how to use Bionet, but also about the different news and mail reading tools available in the public domain (I'm using a completely user-friendly, mouse & menu driven program to post this). The idea is that people will do what is easiest for them to do, so why don't we try to show them how easy it is? +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Chris Dow | IntelliGenetics | | Software Engineer | 700 East El Camino Real | | "My opinions are mine not theirs-->" | Mountain View, Ca. 94040 | | AisA | (415) 962-7320 | | | internet: dow@presto.ig.com | | | icbmnet: 37 22' 39" N, 122 3' 32" W | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
gilbertd@amber.ucs.indiana.edu (03/18/90)
In article <Mar.14.22.45.46.1990.16853@genbank.BIO.NET>, kristoff@genbank.BIO.NET (David Kristofferson) writes... >... there now is a version of USENET news software >which runs on a Mac, but I haven't seen it yet and so cannot comment >on its ease of use. (Doug, care to join in?) If it is a class job, >maybe this need has been or is about to be filled. I've recently posted to the bionet.software newsgroup brief guides to obtaining and installing the Macintosh netnews reader stack and VMS-Vax newsreader software. The Mac news reader is pretty easy to use. The VMS newsreader VNews is somewhat more obscure, but works well. While established scientists may be slow at picking up on network news, undergrad and grad students are quick (and eager) to use it -- mainly for social/sports/talk/alternate news and of course, rec.humor.funny. If you wait an academic generation (5-10 years), you'll have no lack of news users. If anyone wants mailings of the guides I posted to bionet.software (BIO- SOFT ? for mail newsgroups) or a repost to this group, let me know. -- Don Don Gilbert, biocomputing office, Indiana U. gilbertd@iubio.bio.indiana.edu
kristoff@genbank.BIO.NET (David Kristofferson) (03/20/90)
> While established scientists may be slow at picking up on network > news, undergrad and grad students are quick (and eager) to use it -- mainly > for social/sports/talk/alternate news and of course, rec.humor.funny. If you > wait an academic generation (5-10 years), you'll have no lack of news > users. > Don, I have already been contacted by one influential person who complained that the "established scientists" don't use electronic communications because there is nothing there for them to get excited about (I'll address this *serious* concern below). Now their attitude will be reinforced by a further argument that their workers will be wasting their time reading rec.humor.funny instead of keeping their noses to the grindstone. Because of the above, it needs to be pointed out that any USENET site can RESTRICT THEIR RECEIPT OF NEWSGROUPS to only those that are desired. For example, only the bionet.* groups, or even just a subset of those, could be received. Frankly, at the risk of angering the laboring masses who might enjoy a joke to lighten their loads now and then, my personal opinion is that most of the other groups, e.g., alt.* rec.*, except for the comp (computer) groups, are mostly a waste of time and disk space (although I am sure that some cynics will say the same thing about the bionet groups 8-)! The bottom line is that the workers need not be distracted from their labors by trivia. Assuming that this issue has been defrayed, I'd like to address the content issue which was raised by the anonymous source above. We have been working on raising the content level gradually over the last several years (witness the journal Table of Contents postings on bionet.journals.contents, NIH Guide on bionet.sci-resources, discussion of database issues on bionet.molbio.genbank, distribution of database updates onbionet.molbio.genbank.updates). Requests for methods or reagents may seem "contentless" to most scientists excpet when THEY need something 8-) but I have received numerous complimentary notes about the utility of the METHODS group (bionet.molbio.meths-reagnts). Also, although this is not directly related to newsgroups as such, another reason to learn something about electronic communications is to make use of the free database searching services available by e-mail from GenBank as outlined in my earlier message. The final catch is that this is a "chicken and egg" problem to some extent. There *will* be content in the scientific discussions if the people who can provide the content participate. We have worked hard over the last four years to set up some very useful tools. You, the established scientists, now have before you the choice to either utilize them or leave them to the next generation as Don indicates above. Let's look in greater depth at what I believe is the real issue among established scientists. These people are extremely busy. They don't want to spend their time learning a new way to communicate unless they can see obvious benefits. Unfortunately most of them do not seem to me to realize how much they *could* benefit from this system. An example in point: During one trip to Washington quite some time back, I met with a senior editor of a prominent journal to discuss use of BIONET and a couple of hours working with him. This person was relatively new to computing and was struggling with some of the usual pitfalls with getting modems hooked up, etc. However, he **had decided to invest the time** and had become very enthusiastic about all the possibilities in a very short time. In fact his secretary told me that he went out, bought a typing tutor program (PROBABLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST UNSPOKEN HURDLES - BLUSH!!), and now was faster than she was!!!! The person that I am speaking about is not in his twenties either. I am sure that similar stories could be told about other "established scientists" and will be in time. Failing that we will once again witness the fulfillment of Max Planck's dictum that new ideas take hold only as their older opponents die off, not through rational debate. I sincerely hope that informatics progress for the Genome Project is not encumbered by such hesitations. -- Sincerely, Dave Kristofferson GenBank On-line Service Manager kristoff@genbank.bio.net