tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Linking in with StackOverlow & al) 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla & Feed Publisher Noah Snyder comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6915) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6915#Comment_6915 2010-07-13T11:53:58-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Noah Snyder http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/59/ Good point. José Figueroa comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6914) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6914#Comment_6914 2010-07-13T11:50:15-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 José Figueroa http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/68/ Would "buying ads" not be frowned upon by grant-giving organisations? Even if in effect this is what is being done, it's perhaps prudent that it not be billed as such. Would "buying ads" not be frowned upon by grant-giving organisations? Even if in effect this is what is being done, it's perhaps prudent that it not be billed as such.

]]>
Noah Snyder comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6913) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6913#Comment_6913 2010-07-13T10:39:33-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Noah Snyder http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/59/ It occurred to me that a better way of phrasing the "no ads" would be to request that in the even that there are ads we be given adequate warning (say 6 monhts) and the ability to ... José Figueroa comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6906) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6906#Comment_6906 2010-07-13T05:40:13-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 José Figueroa http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/68/ For the record, Cornell is not dumping arXiv, they're simply not willing to continue funding it 100%. I blogged about it here For the record, Cornell is not dumping arXiv, they're simply not willing to continue funding it 100%. I blogged about it here

]]>
Andrea comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6903) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6903#Comment_6903 2010-07-13T02:59:35-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Andrea http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/170/ If anything, I see this as a motivation to find alternative funding methods for MathSciNet in order to be used freely. VP comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6896) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6896#Comment_6896 2010-07-12T23:02:56-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 VP http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/238/ Not disagreeing with theojf, but in the interests of accuracy, I would rank MathSciNet alongside arXiv (in fact, somewhat higher) in the list of most important research tools. And they should be ... Not disagreeing with theojf, but in the interests of accuracy, I would rank MathSciNet alongside arXiv (in fact, somewhat higher) in the list of most important research tools. And they should be compared for funding models purposes. Of course, just like everyone else, I would hate to see arXiv going the subscription-only route, but who knows what lies ahead? (I wasn't aware that Cornell is dumping arXiv, by the way.)

]]>
theojf comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6860) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6860#Comment_6860 2010-07-11T22:01:45-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 theojf http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/96/ To the extent that I have any vote (which is to say: not at all), I strongly support adding "no ads" to the list of nonnegotiable demands. MO should be an academic site, supported by ... To the extent that I have any vote (which is to say: not at all), I strongly support adding "no ads" to the list of nonnegotiable demands. MO should be an academic site, supported by grants. (Just like the NSF really should step in and provide full support for arXiv, which I think is the single most important research tool in mathematics and physics in the world. Fortunately, their current funding model is "ask large academic libraries to support us", now that "ask Cornell to support us" is failing, and university libraries tend to be fairly against monetization.)

]]>
Harry Gindi comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6858) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6858#Comment_6858 2010-07-11T19:36:44-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Harry Gindi http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/55/ I apologize for my earlier comments. It was not my intention to hurt MO's reputation by calling GS names (that may or may not be applicable...). I apologize for my earlier comments. It was not my intention to hurt MO's reputation by calling GS names (that may or may not be applicable...).

]]>
Anton Geraschenko comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6828) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6828#Comment_6828 2010-07-10T22:10:05-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Anton Geraschenko http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/2/ @Everyone: I think we're getting ahead of ourselves. It's fine to have a discussion about what SO Inc's position should be, but it's a waste of time to get up in arms about terms of migration that ... @Everyone: I think we're getting ahead of ourselves. It's fine to have a discussion about what SO Inc's position should be, but it's a waste of time to get up in arms about terms of migration that don't even exist yet. Most of us at MO like SO and I'm pretty sure that SO Inc likes us, even though the purpose of SE has shifted since September. When migration is actually on the table, we'll see if we can make everybody happy. Until then, we're just speculating. For example, I'm pretty sure SE 2.0 site will have administrators. My email exchanges with Robert Cartaino have led me to believe that it's quite likely that MO will be able to migrate essentially unchanged. I'm as curious about what will happen as anybody else, but until SO Inc actually starts thinking about migrating SE 1.0 sites, the conversation has gone about as far as it productively can.

@Kyle: I hope Noah's answer and comment have clarified our position. I'm quite happy with SO, and I realize that they are interested in communities doing well. However, there's simply no guarantee that their interests won't conflict with ours. The point isn't that I really want to be a moderator on MO, it's that if there is ever a real conflict between SO and MO, somebody in the MO community has to have the power to completely move the site onto another platform. Maintaining ownership of the domain and access to full data dumps is necessary for that.

I certainly hope there won't ever be such a problem, but the whole point of negotiating a contract is that your relationship may change. If your friend promises to pay for all repairs to your house so long as you hand over the deed, it may sound like a great deal. After all, who cares whose name is on the paper? You keep living in your house, but somebody else pays for all the repairs. However, the name on the paper may become very important if your friend's interests ever start to diverge from yours. With any luck, you'll be friends forever, but you'd be a fool to treat that assumption as a certainty.

]]>
Harry Gindi comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6825) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6825#Comment_6825 2010-07-10T16:33:30-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Harry Gindi http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/55/ @Kyle: I don't understand why we couldn't just pay for SE2.0 like we would have paid for SE1.0... @Kyle: I don't understand why we couldn't just pay for SE2.0 like we would have paid for SE1.0...

]]>
Noah Snyder comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6823) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6823#Comment_6823 2010-07-10T15:30:30-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Noah Snyder http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/59/ It does sound that way at face value, except that the SO people seem excited to have us on SE 2.0 and so far have sounded willing to make some compromises to keep us on board. It's just a question ... kyle comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6822) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6822#Comment_6822 2010-07-10T15:19:03-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 kyle http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/242/ @Noah It does sound like perhaps Stack Exchange 2.0 isn't a good fit for MathOverflow. The updated software wouldn't have a concept of an 'administrator', so it wouldn't be possible for anyone (even ... Noah Snyder comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6821) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6821#Comment_6821 2010-07-10T14:54:34-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Noah Snyder http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/59/ Kyle, I think the reason for the "wow lots of jerks over there" reaction is more to George's answer than your question and comments. But I also think you're missing the point, if ... Harry Gindi comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6818) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6818#Comment_6818 2010-07-10T13:54:15-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Harry Gindi http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/55/ I second Andy's sentiment. And Andrea's as well. I second Andy's sentiment.

And Andrea's as well.

]]>
Andrea comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6817) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6817#Comment_6817 2010-07-10T13:31:21-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Andrea http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/170/ The reason for joining SE 2.0 would be getting updates and new features. It is NOT the case that we have little confidence in the Stack Exchange team. Nevertheless, we (or at least I) feel that it ...
Consider this example: I regularly use gThumb to tag and organize my photos. For a long time gThumb has not used stadard tags (ITPC, XMP...) inside the photos, but a custom system. As a result, I could not try any different photo manager, even I thought it was better. gThumb is still my favorite manager, but being trapped into it felt somehow limitating.

When MathOverflow was launched, the agreement was that we paid a monthly fee, and we could have control over the site. Now we are not requested to pay anymore, even if we would be glad to, but are not granted the same level of control (if we move to SE 2.0).

Consider, among other things, that Anton has often used his administrator rights to adjust CSS and JS to our needs, in particular support for LaTeX was added this way.]]>
Andy Putman comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6813) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6813#Comment_6813 2010-07-10T13:15:33-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Andy Putman http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/113/ @kyle : The reason we want this power is because we want to ensure that MO continues to be controlled by the academic mathematical community. Personally (and I suspect that this view is held by many ... kyle comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6811) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6811#Comment_6811 2010-07-10T12:59:36-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 kyle http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/242/ It's not my intention to be hostile to the MathOverflow community, it's just my opinion that the 'non-negotiable' demands of MO shouldn't be accepted. I understand the desire to maintain control over ... Steve Huntsman comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6809) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6809#Comment_6809 2010-07-10T12:33:55-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Steve Huntsman http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/110/ What Andrea said. Andrea comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6808) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6808#Comment_6808 2010-07-10T12:25:37-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Andrea http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/170/ Much more ostility then I imagined. I guess these people are not involved in the future of SO. If comments like these came from official sources, we should really consider migration. Harry Gindi comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6802) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6802#Comment_6802 2010-07-10T11:06:52-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Harry Gindi http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/55/ Wow, those people are jerks. Wow, those people are jerks.

]]>
Suresh Venkat comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6800) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6800#Comment_6800 2010-07-10T10:26:54-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Suresh Venkat http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/175/ Some updates to the discussion on meta.stackoverflow.com and some hostility. http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/56514/any-updates-on-stack-exchange-1-0-migration Jacques Carette comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6398) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6398#Comment_6398 2010-06-24T12:07:26-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Jacques Carette http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/260/ @Harry: lol! @Harry: lol!

]]>
Harry Gindi comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6368) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6368#Comment_6368 2010-06-24T04:57:31-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Harry Gindi http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/55/ @Jacques: By "us", do you mean you and your "other you" or you and your colleagues? ;) @Jacques: By "us", do you mean you and your "other you" or you and your colleagues? ;)

]]>
Jacques Carette comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6365) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6365#Comment_6365 2010-06-24T04:42:40-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Jacques Carette http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/260/ :-). Perhaps we should create a probability section... :-). Perhaps we should create a probability section...

]]>
Andrew Stacey comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6356) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6356#Comment_6356 2010-06-23T23:38:37-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Andrew Stacey http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/4/ In the probability section? (Well, someone had to say it) In the probability section?

(Well, someone had to say it)

]]>
Jacques Carette comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6340) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6340#Comment_6340 2010-06-23T17:00:12-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Jacques Carette http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/260/ This is an interesting discussion for 'the other me', i.e. the Jacques Carette who has been Chair of the Electronic Services Committee for the Canadian Mathematical Society for the last 3 years (and ...
So we've accepted that some ads are ok. And different parts of the web site can get different ads. Throughout, it should be professional. Sponsors for activities like the 'math camps' (whether they are 'math' companies or not) will likely be allowed to put up ads in the 'math camps' section. The Journals part of the site would be an ad-free zone. The question that still nags us: is there anywhere on the site where we would allow an ad from pokerstars,net? [no joke, they asked, and were offering non-trivial $$$].]]>
Noah Snyder comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6226) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6226#Comment_6226 2010-06-20T09:42:11-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Noah Snyder http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/59/ I agree, a Math Overflow Careers wouldn't bother me the way ads would. Scott Morrison comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6223) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6223#Comment_6223 2010-06-19T16:18:20-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Scott Morrison http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/3/ Ads are a good point. Personally, I wouldn't make this a show stopper, but I think it's unlikely to be a problem. If Fog Creek want some revenue from us (as they should!), and suggest ads, we can ... Ads are a good point. Personally, I wouldn't make this a show stopper, but I think it's unlikely to be a problem. If Fog Creek want some revenue from us (as they should!), and suggest ads, we can quite seriously just offer to double what they expect to earn from ads.

One interesting long term possibility is an extension of Stack Overflow Careers to MathOverflow. Now, there are lots of reasons why this might be inappropriate --- in particular, no one is about to seriously propose changing the way that academic hiring works --- but there may well be more overlap between our user base and the people that certain companies are looking to hire than you might at first think. Stack Overflow Careers actually seems to do a pretty good job at its niche --- really good programming companies hiring really good programmers. If Fog Creek were interested in trying to monetize MathOverflow by creating a parallel, unobtrusive site for mathematicians to post CVs and companies to post mathematician-wanted ads, then I wouldn't object at all, and good luck to them! :-)

]]>
Noah Snyder comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6222) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6222#Comment_6222 2010-06-19T15:26:40-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Noah Snyder http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/59/ The problem I see with ads is less that they're obtrusive and more that they're unprofessional. If SE needs to make money off our site we should be paying it through grants, not through ... Jacques Carette comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6219) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6219#Comment_6219 2010-06-19T11:52:43-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Jacques Carette http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/260/ @Noah: the ads on SO are not bad at all. I personally would not make this requirement a show-stopper. Ask for it, sure. Don't upgrade because of it? I would be less sure.@Scott: thanks for the ...
@Scott: thanks for the detailed answer. Very clear.]]>
Noah Snyder comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6216) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6216#Comment_6216 2010-06-19T08:45:33-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Noah Snyder http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/59/ And no ads. Scott Morrison comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6215) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6215#Comment_6215 2010-06-19T08:35:05-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Scott Morrison http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/3/ @Jacques, yes. Essentially, the StackExchange people have told us that we can migrate, and they'll contact us at some point about the details of how this will work. We've been told that there is ... @Jacques,

yes. Essentially, the StackExchange people have told us that we can migrate, and they'll contact us at some point about the details of how this will work. We've been told that there is some scope for negotiating with existing StackExchange sites about the actual terms of the migration, but (to my knowledge) this hasn't actually happened at all yet. The StackExchange people like us --- Anton has talked, in person and via email, with a number of people in the company, including Joel Spolsky, right at the top, and we generally get the impression they want to treat us right. On the other hand, it's been a slightly frustrating process not hearing much from them about the transition to 2.0. We have a set of 3 incontrovertible requirements for switching, all of which go against the rules for new StackExchange 2.0 sites.

  1. Anton maintains personal ownership of the mathoverflow.net domain name.
  2. We continue to have access to the full unsanitized database dumps.
  3. Anton continues to have administrator privileges on the site.

(re: 2, all of the StackExchange 2.0 sites will have public data dumps equivalent to what we already provide here. At present, only Anton has access to the unsanitized dumps, and the main purpose of these is so that we can in principle jump ship to an alternative software base.)

So --- we're waiting and seeing, for now!

]]>
Jacques Carette comments on "Linking in with StackOverlow & al" (6210) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/454/linking-in-with-stackoverlow-al/?Focus=6210#Comment_6210 2010-06-19T07:48:32-07:00 2018-11-04T13:46:44-08:00 Jacques Carette http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/260/ Is it being considered to move to StackExchange 2.0, so that one's MathOverflow account can be properly linked with other accounts on like sites?