A central anxiety for literary studies in the era of scientific dominance pertains to the extent to which groupings, taxonomies and classifications are methodologically derived and how far they help us to understand literary production. We all invariably use and create such classifications as terminological shorthands.

Today, I gave a talk at Royal Holloway for the TECHNE consortium of Ph.D. students on open access and scholarly communications. In the second part of the session, as I often do, I opened up into a “blue-skies” game where I ask those present, in groups, to think through what they want from a system of scholarly communications and how they would design it from scratch today if they were freed of practical and social constraints.

New provisions in UK copyright law look promising for text and data mining. Last year, the government signed into effect an exemption to copyright for the purposes of non-commercial research. This states that: Wonderful! So all those novels that are in copyright can actually be data-mined if we can get a digital copy.

This post is part of an ongoing series where I intend to develop my full personal ( not institutional) response to the HE Green Paper. Comments are welcome to refine this. The Green Paper asks in Question 28: The emergent challenge for the UK’s research data infrastructure is in ensuring twofold that: Monopolies do not emerge that control substantial portions of the UK’s research information management systems.

This post is the final in an ongoing series where I intend to develop my full personal ( not institutional) response to the HE Green Paper. Comments are welcome to refine this. You can now download my full response in a Word document format. The document total is 18,750 words. I hereby release this work under a CC0 license.

This post is part of an ongoing series where I intend to develop my full personal ( not institutional) response to the HE Green Paper. Comments are welcome to refine this.

This post is part of an ongoing series where I intend to develop my full personal ( not institutional) response to the HE Green Paper. Comments are welcome to refine this. The Green Paper asks in Question 26: I am responding here in a personal capacity and so cannot write on behalf of an institution; I will instead address the benefits to the wider sector and the general public.

This post is part of an ongoing series where I intend to develop my full personal ( not institutional) response to the HE Green Paper. Comments are welcome to refine this. The Green Paper asks in Question 25: I think that the housing of both streams of funding under a single entity could be intensely problematic.

So, probably against my better thoughts with respect to quantified self stuff, I got a fitness tracker for Christmas: the Jaybird Reign. The trouble was, regardless of what I tried, it just wouldn’t pair with my phone (I’d followed all the instructions). I grudgingly waited until the tech. support team was open and got in touch, thinking I’d have to RMA the unit.

Dear Sir/Madam, I write in a personal capacity to request an internal review of my partially denied FOI request with the reference FOI2015/25797 (pertaining to meetings between senior BIS officials and Elsevier/Thomson Reuters). Details in the request were denied on the basis of a Section 43 public interest test.