Scientific Research X Blockchain X [800+ followers celebrations] / 科學研究X 區塊鏈 X 800+追隨者慶祝

Thank you for my 800+ followers, yay, thank you for your great support~
Steemit has changed my life for the past 4 months, apart from gaining SBD and Steem, it has also expose me to the concepts of cryptocurrency and blockchain.
謝謝800+的追捧者，呀，謝謝你的大力支持〜
Steemit在過去4個月中改變了我的生活，除了獲得SBD和Steem之外，它還讓我了解了加密貨幣和區塊鏈的概念。

The idea of centralization or the presence of middlemen is really important in the past, when communications were expensive and information were scattered without much organization. This is especially true for scientific research, in the past, where scientific journals are still printed out and send as hard copies, the role of middlemen were critical for organization and save guarding the quality of the scientific works done by each author groups.
中心化或中間人的存在,在過去是非常重要，因為通信費用昂貴，信息沒組織地分散在世界各 。 科學研究尤其如此，過去科技期刊是印刷出來，作為印刷品，中間人的作用對組織至關重要，同時也保護了作者群體科學作品質量。

However as time progress, information access becomes widely available to the general public. Scientific journals are now mainly distributed via the Internet as soft copy rather than printouts. This now would be a great time to incorporate the application of blockchain to enhance scientific researches. And the platform Steemit-like platform can make a great backbone to serve such purpose.
但隨著時間和科技進步，信息獲取對於廣大公眾變得廣泛及容易。科學期刊現在主要通過互聯網作為傳播媒體而不是打印出來。現在這將是一個很好的時機來結合區塊鏈的應用來加強科學研究。 Steemit 類的平台可以為實現這一目的做出巨大貢獻。

---

Scientific researches, especially in academia, is largely revolving around the journal publications. The journal publications (e-copies or hard copies) are the main form of “scholarly communication”. So all the ultimate goals for most academic researchers are to make big publications.
科學研究，特別是在學術界，主要圍繞期刊出版。雜誌出版物（電子版或複印件）是“學術交流”的主要形式。 因此，大多數學術研究者的所有最終目標都是製作大量出版物。

The Academic publishing cycle

Scholars/ researchers, first write grants proposals, stating their project ideas as well as the possible preliminary work and future applications. Once the money part is settled, the researchers can have funding for conducting their researches. When enough data were acquired, the researchers can proceed on their publications, by writing up a manuscript, submitting to journal’s publish group for peer views and editing. After all those works are done, the manuscript is accepted for publication, and become available to their subscribers. Grant funding depends largely on your publication track records. |

學術出版週期

學者/研究人員首先撰寫研究資助建議書，說明他們的項目想法以及可能的初步工作和未來的應用。 一旦錢那部分得到解決，研究人員就可以有資金進行研究。 當獲得足夠的數據時，研究人員可以通過撰寫手稿，提交給雜誌的發布小組進行同行觀點和編輯，從而進行出版。所有這些作品完成後，手稿被接受出版，並可供其訂閱者使用。有文章發表就有研究資助。

Being able to publish in big journals like the Cell, Nature, Science will almost secure a good grant or a promising career path. Yet numerous problems could arise from the existing style of publication:
-Only positive data are likely to be reported, while reporting of negative data could save time and money for other research group, but gave no career advantage to any groups reporting them.
-Data are reviewed by selected peers only, peers review are not as critical as it meant to be, as politics and interpersonal relationship plays a major factor in the stringency of the review.
-Low protection against data fabrications, only limited amount of data were included in the manuscripts, which could easily be biased by the author’s will to get publications.
-Competitions between research groups on similar topics, leading to unwillingness of information sharing.
-Fighting for authorships, lacking of clear indicators of work contribution by each authors.
-Funding bodies can only rely on progress reports, as well as tends to be blinded by the impact factor.
-Journal accesses are frequently blocked by paywalls (subscription fees), which were reasonable in the past, but getting more and more unreasonable nowadays.

能夠在像“細胞，自然”，“科學”這樣的大型期刊上發表，幾乎可以獲得良好的資助或”有希望”的職業發展。 然而，現有的出版風格可能會產生許多問題：

• 只有正面的研究數據可能會被報告，而負面數據的報告其實可以為其他研究小組節省時間和金錢，但這些報告對他們的團體沒有任何職業優勢。
  -科學結果僅由選定的對等人仕進行審查，同行評審並不像預期那樣重要，因為政治和人際關係是審查嚴格性的主要因素。
• 防止數據造假，手稿中僅包含有限數據，這可能容易被作者的出版意願偏見。
• 研究團體之間在類似主題上的競爭，導致不願意共享信息。
• 爭取作者身份，缺乏每位作者對工作貢獻的明確指標。
• 資助機構只能依靠進度報告，而且往往被影響因素蒙蔽。
• 日常訪問經常被付費牆（訂閱費）阻止，這在過去是合理的，但現在越來越不合理。

Blockchain in science research could connect us all

區塊鏈可以連接科學研究中的所有人

The application of a blockchain technologies to scientific research field might be able to over come many of the problems above. Ideally, could decentralized from all the middlemen from funding agencies to publication groups for the research results to be distributed.
將區塊鏈技術應用於科研領域可能會超越上述許多問題。 理想情況下，可以將所有中介人從資助機構及出版社分出來，以便分發研究成果。

-Every experiment can be reported regardless of positive or negative results, this in turn could be accessed by others. In this way, independent groups won’t be ending up wasting resources on similar experiments knowing to have negative results. Not to mention that, the general public could possibly benefit from by passing the need of subscription fees to access scientific journals.

• 無論正面或負面研究的結果如何，都可以報告每個實驗，而這可以由其他人參考。以這種方式，獨立團體能知道有負面結果的類似實驗而防止浪費資源。 同時可以幫助一般公眾避免因為需要訂閱費用而獲取科學期刊而受益。

-Allowing open access of the information made available by each researchers, can provide a significant improvements in reducing the possible interpersonal bias to obtain a much more creditable peer review system (if kept anonymous, even people who are close to the research group could challenge the work submitted) This will greatly reduce the odds of data fabrications, as multiple stage of your research are opened to public and records could be traced. Because each detailed steps could be traced, research groups should work together in making progress on the selected topic, rather than withholding information from others, so to buy oneself enough time to draw the first blood (to publish first). Promoting intergroup interpretation of the data, and to other extends, they may pool together the experimental data to create a more solid finding. Ideas that sparked by anyone within the blockchain could convey it to the researching group. Impact factors can also be accounted for in a whole new way.

• 隨著開放獲取每個研究人員提供的信息，可以顯著改善減少可能的人際偏見，以獲得更多可信的同行評審系統（如果保持匿名，即使接近研究組的人也可能挑戰已提交的內容）這將大大降低數據造假的可能性，因為您的研究的多個階段對公眾開放，記錄可以追溯。因為每一個詳細的步驟都可以追溯到，所以研究小組應該在選擇的主題上進行合作，而不是從別人那裡扣留信息，令自己能得到多一點時間去拿第一血。促進研究組之間對數據的解釋，對其他的擴展，他們可以將實驗數據匯集在一起 。任何人的想法也可經區塊鏈傳達給其他研究組。

This further solves some of the problems such as the fighting for authorship, as what is being done by who can now be well documented and traced. Subscription fees to Journal Publishing groups can then be history. Furthermore such applications could allow patients with adequate knowledge to access the available science to have a better understanding of some of the medical cases they encountered etc. This not only benefits common patients, but also those with orphan disease. The availability to connect with those patients are sometime difficult, but via the blockchain, multiple centers/ institutes can work together to make the whole scientific research progress move forward in a more supportive way then the past competitive way. This way can also greatly enhance the availability of clinical samples number, or facilitate world-wide patient recruits for clinical trials.
這進一步解決一些問題，如爭取作者身份的問題， 現在誰都可以很好地記錄和追踪各人正在做什麼研究。科學期刊出版社的訂閱費可以成為歷史。此外，這樣的應用可以允許具有足夠科學知識的病患了解他們遇到的一些醫療病例等。這不僅有益於普通病患者，而且還有益於孤兒疾病的病患者。 多個研究機構/中心可以與這些病患者聯繫共同努力，使整個科學研究進展以更加支持的方式向前邁進，取代過去的競爭方式。這樣也可以大大增強臨床樣本數量的可用性，或者為世界各地的臨床試驗患者提供便利。

This can also benefits fund donors to take part in different part of a given project, or donate to different part of the community, from project ideas to research groups, or even to patients that were in need of financial aids. They can directly monitor the progress of the project, who has been doing what in which day given moment, were they doing it as they have said so, etc. Different large scientific research institutes can now house the blocks and together form the chains to make this into a feasible platform.
區塊鏈也有利於科研基金捐助者參與,給不同項目部分，或捐贈給不同部分社區的，從項目想法到研究組，甚至是需要財務援助的病患者。他們可以直接監督項目的進度，誰在做什麼，進度成效等等。不同的大型科研機構現在可以成為區塊，一起形成鏈條令這成為可行的平台。

Steemit as a blogging platform actually can fit in many niche require by this area of science. But doing data logging in an open access platform is difficult to convince researchers to drop their old practice and migrate into this immediately open accessing type, exposing all the raw data and all the negatives results. And mostly publications in high tier journals are still the core for career success, so until big institute decided to adopt those system, it is otherwise still far from being real.
Steemit作為博客平台實際上可以滿足這個科學領域的許多需求。但是，在開放獲取平台中進行數據記錄很難說服研究人員放棄舊的做法並將其遷移到這種立即開放的訪問類型中，公開所有原始數據和結果。始終職業成功的核心還是看期刊發表，所以直到大型學院決定採用這種制度，否則這還是紙上談兵的。

An easy access to a “close to real time” information instead of waiting for months / years for a project to be completed, written up and published, will certainly help advance science progress. Nowadays research groups are relying on interpersonal connections to meet up and form alliance with collaborators, but with block chain technologies, everyone can potentially be acquiring much more “perfect” information regarding their needs. And we are moving towards a new era of the cyber space, so old use of journals publishing group middlemen are out dated, or at most, they should just be doing reviews =]
一個容易獲得“接近實時”的信息，而不是等待幾個月/幾年的項目完成，編寫和出版，肯定有助於推動科學進步。如今，研究團體正在依靠人際關係與合作者會面並形成聯盟，但採用塊鏈技術，每個人都可能會獲得更多關於他們需求的“完美”信息。而我們正在走向一個新時代的網絡空間，所以老化了的出版社已過時，或者至多只適合留著發表評論之用 =]

---

如果你喜歡我的帖子，請upvote並關注我 @biuiam
If you like my posts, please upvote and follow me @biuiam
Cheers~

---

SteemSTEM
其次，請考慮支持@steemstem項目。 SteemSTEM是一個社區驅動的項目，目的是促進Steemit的寫作/信息科學技術工程和數學發表。該項目不僅通過upvote和resteem STEM帖子，而且還將STEEM Power作為獎勵重新分配給Steemit不斷在科學/技術成長的社區成員。

要了解有關該項目的更多信息，請加入我們的steemit.chat（https://steemit.chat/channel/steemSTEM)， 我們一直在尋找幫跟我們理念相同 -- 追求提高STEM（和健康）帖子質量的人，在我們不斷增長的平台上發帖，所以我們很樂意聽到你的聲音！