Saturday, May 24, 2008

Its time to be more innovative


I must disagree with my colleauge in the health 2.0 world - Bertalan Mesko who is writing the excellent blog - Scienceroll.
In one of his latest post he wrote about a new platform called

Bertalan called it : "Facebook for scientist"
Maybe it is . Maybe its a great platform but still it seems to be a generic one .
Im disagrre with the pharse :
" changes the picture by offering international networking technology to scientists of all disciplines. It is the world’s first platform of its kind and features numerous technological highlights that simplify research cooperation".

People, we must be more innovative . There are numerous platforma that are trying to be the "Facebook for scientist" already. Some will say there are even more .
Now we are looking for something new, something that leed us to the next step not saying the next generation.


Anonymous said...

and what are you doing that is so innovative?

At least they have a real product out and are doing something interesting.

all you did was post a website that links to other medical 2.0 websites - is that innovative?

Anonymous said...

It seems that someone took it personally and it wasnt the meaning.

The idea for that post is to make a statement and to progress an advanced dialog around the "social community concept".

We must clarify :
There isnt something new about establish another social community without introduce any kind of new platform or application in it.

About Medical 2.0 .com :

Sorry but its meaning is not to be a "start up" .
It is only a service for those who are want to be introduced with the health 2.0 world.
How many "Facebook" do we need?
How many " Health facebook" do we need?

To be innovative is even to take the social community and give him some kind of new interpetation or even new kind of business direction and thats my point - to progress even in a small steps.

Dr. Uri Ginzburg

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

By the way, the last comment isn't meant to be as agressive as it might seem. They are genuine points and questions - it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.

IjadMad said...

Dear Dr. Ginzburg,

first of all I want to thank you for writing about ResearchGATE in your blog. I have to admit that I share a lot of points with you, which you mentioned in your blog entry. However, I think (as a researcher) there doesnt still exist a reasonable web 2.0 platform adapted to requirements of researchers, yet. Therefore, we started with this project. I want to build and establish this platform based on a very strong academic background (view our science advisorys at our homepage and the recent article about ResearchGATE published in Science (May 30th 2008) We will start next week our own ResearchGATE blog and then we will show to the scientific community that ResearchGATE is more than just an online platform.
Nevertheless, your point with "innovative tools has to be implemented" is a valid one. At the moment it may not seem innovative, but we have tremendous applications in the pipeline, which will be unique. I will keep you updated, if you are interested in that. In addition to this blog entry, I wanted to contact you personally, but I couldn't find any email address on this page. My email address is ijad.madisch (@) researchgate (.) net. Maybe you write me an email, so I have yours.

One another point to clarify: I can assure you that this anonymous man/woman, which commented your blog entry, wasn't from the ResearchGATE team.

Thanks for your valid critical feedback. We know that constructive criticism is pushing the platform into the right direction.

Best regards
Ijad Madisch