Blockchain for research: a real opportunity or just hype?

[mozfest-bot]

[ UUID ] 7bf4a385-0fbc-4588-b85d-d00baf865f38

[ Session Name ] Blockchain for research: a real opportunity or just hype? [ Primary Space ] Decentralization [ Secondary Space ] Open Innovation

[ Submitter's Name ] Naomi Penfold [ Submitter's Affiliated Organisation ] eLife [ Submitter's Github ] @npscience

What will happen in your session?

We propose an open debate featuring people who work on blockchain projects for science and research, as well as people who are pessimistic about the application of blockchain in this way. We would invite (preferably in advance) two speakers on each side of the debate to give opening remarks, then a facilitator would invite points and questions from the floor. It would be great to have an illustrator document the discussion.

What is the goal or outcome of your session?

The goal would be to raise awareness of the potential utility that blockchain could serve for science as well as its limits. A good outcome would be to connect blockchain developers to researchers working on these problems.

If your session requires additional materials or electronic equipment, please outline your needs.

If anticipated to be a popular session, a PA and mic system would be useful. Otherwise, we may just need a seating arrangement for a debate (panel plus audience). If possible, an illustrator to ‘draw’ document the debate as it happens would be amazing!

Time needed

60 mins

[npscience]

Hi @KadeMorton and @chartgerink - what do you think about this idea? Would you like to be involved? I would love your feedback!

[npscience]

Note https://www.creativechain.org/project/ as non-research but similar application of blockchain to produced (creative) works

[Saallen]

adding myself in here

[KadeMorton]

Would absolutely love to participate, would be keen to speak on the affirmative team. I'd speak on the negative team if we needed numbers for the session to go ahead, but would only be to play devil's advocate, as someone working on a blockchain project I do feel the technology has merit.

@npscience as an aside, I am familiar with creative chain. Different model to what we're trying to build with Aletheia and I have some questions, not about the underlying blockchain technology but around the application to for profit publishing. That said I'm supportive of projects that remove gatekeepers and put power in the hands of the community.

[npscience]

Apparently @chartgerink is also keen.

@KadeMorton thanks for offering to take the devil's advocate approach if needed, let's see how this shapes up. I'm excited to chat about Aletheia regardless :)

[jontutcher]

Hey all - this sounds great. Sounds like you're already on the hunt for panelists and have some excellent ideas! I'd be keen for there to be a chair/moderator too (not very decentralized!) as I can envisage it turning into a general pro/anti-blockchain discussion otherwise!

[npscience]

Hooray! We're accepted. Thanks @vigneshwerd! Do you have an idea of anticipated demand for this? Are we talking lecture-style debate or small room discussion?

To do list for me:

• [ ] assemble balanced panel (3-4 people)
• [ ] Find chair/moderator
• [ ] Secure illustrator for session
• [ ] Connect illustrator to panellists for prelim research
• [ ] 👍 👎 signs to show feeling before and after discussion?

Materials required from Mozilla:

• [ ] Seating
• [ ] AV if beyond a small audience (or even if small audience, for accessibility)
• [ ] Projector, etc IF panellists want slides - tbc. Would it be possible?

[KadeMorton]

Just reaffirming my willingness to be a part of this if you need numbers.

[jontutcher]

Hey @npscience - just to clarify, I wasn't volunteering to be the chair/moderator myself! Can do it if you need someone, but I expect that there will be some far more qualified people around that'll do a better job. Give me a shout and we can sort something :)

[npscience]

Hi @KadeMorton - I'd love you to be a panellist. Would you mind dropping me an email at n.penfold /at/ elifesciences.org please? Thanks 👾

[dvigneshwer]

Hi @npscience,

As MozFest is approaching we require the following information from your end to better support your session in the Decentralization learning forum space. You can get back to us by replying to this issue or emailing us directly, whichever communication channel is convenient to you.

1. Provide us a brief outline of your session topics and time estimates
2. Please let us know if you want to make any modification to your session proposal

I am not very sure about the demand aspect will try to get back to you on that asap and IMHO lecture-style debate is more appropriate but it's your call.

Thank you! Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any queries.

[kaodro]

Hi @npscience , my name is Kasia and I work on Mozilla’s Internet Health Report. At Mozfest we will be present with an “Internet Research Hub” #618 (last comment) - an easy-going, cozy space for discussions and networking both with us about Internet Health and among researchers themselves.

We also invite anyone who does work in an Internet research field to sign up and present their work at a couple of open display tables we will have in the hub. If you would like to present something in the Hub in addition to your official session, let me know! We will promote these sessions throughout the festival. You can sign up spontaneously with pen and paper on site or if you would like to save a spot beforehand, drop me an email at kasia@mozillafoundation.org with a short description of the session.

In any case, I would like to invite you to pass by the hub and say hi. We will start with an informal "Research and coffee grinder” get-together at the beginning of the festival where people can get to know each other. Space and exact schedule for the Hub are still being decided and I will update you once we know the details. Hope to see you there!

[npscience]

@vigneshwerd - please see update below, and let me know if any Qs. Many thanks!

Time required 60 minutes

Brief outline of session 0-5 minutes | Welcome people in, get prepped, organiser welcome, initial vote 5-10 minutes | Introduction to topic by chair (with slides if needed) 10-30 minutes | Three panellists offer 5-minute intro statements (with slides if needed) 30-55 minutes | Q&A/debate session, moderated by chair, taking comments and Qs from audience 55-60 minutes | Chair summarises, final vote

Requirements Updated from comment above

• [ ] projector for slides
  • [ ] what connectors are available for laptops to projector? Will there be access to electricity points?
• [ ] AV if not a small audience
• [ ] seating (lecture-style?)
• [ ] flipchart and pens for illustrator (tbc, enquiring)

Scheduling Please note some panellists will also be involved with other events at MozFest:

• @kademorton will be leading session #10

[npscience]

@vigneshwerd actually, after the facilitators call just now, I'd like to reshape this session into something far more participatory - like a world cafe, or guided exploration workshop, with lots of post-its and participation. Update to follow shortly.

[dvigneshwer]

@npscience Thanks for the rough draft above & keep me posted regarding the changes.

[maboa]

@npscience - just to confirm we're moving this to The Shed - the hands-on area :)

[npscience]

Thanks @vigneshwerd & @maboa!

Key resources:

• The plan for the workshop (plus copied in full below)
• A template for the output documentation from the workshop

Materials required

From Mozilla:

• [ ] three flipcharts and pads
• [ ] two tables or walls
• [ ] lots of post-its (four colours) and pens

I think we will need one hour for the session to run through, and enough space for people to move around. Access to some power to run any laptops/tablets would be great, if possible.

Please bear in mind scheduling constraints of key participants, e.g. @KadeMorton.

From session lead:

• [ ] Voting signs for hype / opportunity / don’t know? Or just raise hands? Or have one sign for each and ask people to move to the sign (take photo at this point)
• [ ] Structured questions for discussions, e.g. printouts of these
• [ ] Some example issues/features/constraints to see the discussions
• [ ] Role play cards: facilitator, documenter, timekeeper x multiple copies (up to 6 groups?)
• [ ] Nominated documenter (see expected outputs)
• [ ] Photographer or videographer?

---

What is the aim?

The aim is for participants to learn about blockchain and about issues in research communication, and to crowdsource opportunities and limitations for blockchain in research communication.

We would like to learn:

• [ ] What are the key features of blockchain that people think are useful for research communication?
• [ ] Are these features possible to deliver through other means? What is the benefit of using blockchain?
• [ ] What are the limitations of blockchain in the research communication space?
• [ ] Are there blockchain developers who are interested in working on this problem for open science?

Who is this for?

(Any of the following)

• Participants with an understanding of blockchain - to share what they know and learn about an application of blockchain for public good.
• Participants with an understanding of issues in research communication - to share what they know and their vision for redesigning the system, and to learn about blockchain technologies.
• Participants who have experience in or are interested in gaining experience in developing blockchain applications for a real-world issue are strongly encouraged to attend for learning and for networking with people leading projects in this space.
• Participants who enjoy facilitating, documenting - by drawing or by live blogging - and organising information on post-its and flipcharts are very welcome to contribute to our session!

Session outline

The session will run as an active workshop.

With up to 12 participants, we can run as a single group. With more than 12 participants, we will split into smaller groups for effective discussion.

Schedule

0-5 minutes | Welcome participants - encourage networking throughout the session, outline aims for output, invite people to contribute knowledge and/or documentation skills throughout. Ask participants about their experience and motivation (ask a few if a large group). Take a beginning temperature: raise hands if you think blockchain for research is an opportunity, a hype, or don’t know. Note the result If we need to split into groups, we can use this introduction time to ask people to raise their hands if they have expertise in anything of the desired areas (blockchain, research communication, documentation, questioning/facilitation) and ensure the groups have a good mix of each.

5-20 minutes | The issues in research communication

Q: If we were to redesign research communication today, how would we do it? What would be key features and constraints?

• One participant presents 5-minute quick intro to issues in research communication to whole room or to their own group (depending on number of keen participants; @npscience is happy to deliver this if noone else steps forward).
• Groups spend 10 minutes designing an ideal research communication system for the future. Outcome: post-its with key features and key constraints. Alternative: post-its describing key issues/desires for research communication.
• Roleplay cards are supplied to assist groups to do this: the ‘facilitator’ keeps the conversation focussed (i.e. we care about a constructive vision, not an opportunity to air grievances) and ensures everyone has a chance to participate; the ‘documenter’ ensures that key features and constraints are documented on individual post-its; the ‘timekeeper’ keeps a check on the time and reports when 5, 8 and 10 minutes are up.

20-35 minutes | Blockchain

Q: What are the key features and constraints of blockchain?

• One participant presents 5-minute quick intro to blockchain technologies to the whole room or to their own group (depending on number of keen participants; I am searching one+ willing volunteer for this - @kademorton seems a sensible shout, could you pretty please? :smile:)
• Groups spend 10 minutes discussing the key features and constraints of blockchain. Outcome: post-its with key features and key constraints of blockchain technologies.
• Roleplay cards are supplied to assist groups to do this: the ‘facilitator’ keeps the conversation focussed (i.e. we care most about features/constraints of relevance to research communication) and ensures everyone has a chance to participate; the ‘documenter’ ensures that key features and constraints are documented on individual post-its; the ‘timekeeper’ keeps a check on the time and reports when 5, 8 and 10 minutes are up.

35-40 minutes | Mapping exercise to match up features and constraints of blockchain with vision for research communication

• Collect post-its for features and constraints into a central space.
• Ask participants to arrange post-its into groups to show matching blockchain features and research communication features/issues, plus identify where constraints conflict with features.

40-50 minutes | Group discussion to assess the situation - are there opportunities? What are the constraints / limitations / blockers?

• TBC: How best to document this?

50-55 minutes | Synthesise and conclude

• Invite final comments, proposals, pushback.
• Vote: hype, opportunity, or don’t know Note the result

55-60 minutes | Reflection time

• Invite participants to share what they have learnt today and/or their hopes and expectations for future of research communication and/or blockchain
• Encourage participants to network and share contacts before they leave.

[RadManDan]

Hi, due to the sizing to the venue, we don't allow Mics for sessions. We don't have close rooms, all sessions are open so we don't want to disturb other sessions. @npscience Regarding an illustrator, you are more than welcome to source it but this is something we can not provide

[npscience]

Hi @RadManDan thanks for the info.

We actually don’t need a mic anymore (new session materials info in amended details, see comment above, basically only stationery) and I looked into getting an illustrator but they weren’t affordable.

Thanks though!