约翰正在提供不同的资金级别：您可以获得一点点（5美元）并获得PDF。这基本上是捐赠。或者您可以承诺17美元并获得本书的签名副本。这是偷窃。或者您可以批评750美元并从我的创作科学档案馆获得“纪念品包装的漂亮的东西，包括我的原始笔记本电脑，与我的编辑，一类样机等的对应副本等。创建科学后，若干哈利波特之后，you’ll be able to sell this on Ebay for a fortune.” That’s hilarious, and not totally insane.
还有其他项目像Kickstarter这样的项目，但无论如何，我可以告诉这一点是在任何特定纪律的学术观众身边。想象一下，这样的工具可能看起来像学术出版。想象一下，例如，这方面的日志这样运行。提出了研究的主题或收集，以及资金目标，获得资助的项目有钱支付编辑工作，副本，促销，甚至按需出版工作。至少，这是一个简单的方式开放访问。Anti-OA people like the publishing staff of the AAA always wave the “pay-to-publish” bogeyman at anyone who argues that our work should be freely available (“OMG. It will cost you $9000 per article, we can’t do that!”). So bypass them. Start your own edited volume and raise what you think you’d need to pay someone to edit and manage it (hey you, yes I’m talking to you, the assistant professor trying to get tenure, you end up doing all that work FOR FREE anyways, what do you have to lose here?). Use your AAA Membership fees to contribute to other people’s edited projects that you think deserve to be published and read. It could engage the population of people who care about your work most. It’s an alternative to conventional grant-writing etc.
但甚至超过它，它可以改变同行评审和质量监测。目前，Kickstarter是“邀请”，无论如何。Imagine a scholarly version in which rather than it being “inivitation only” one has to constitute a mini-editorial board of respected scholars (for whatever value of ‘respected’) who would sign off on a project, peer review it and stamp it with a seal of approval (we do this for free already, or at most for $350 in books). My mind reels with the possibilities this has for improving the sorry state of scholarly publishing today. Kickstarter probably isn’t the right forum for this. In fact, I know it isn’t. But some enterprising people from the university press world could get together and make something like this happen right (hint hint). It could even be a consortium of existing presses, if they could solve the collective action problem of saving themselves from extinction. In fact, they might want to check into Kickstarter’s business model: they get 5% of successful projects. In other words, Step 3: Profit!
我遇到了一些研究，这些研究已经确定了这两种恐怖描述性术语，“不礼貌”和“信息觅食”，当您在线工作时。有这种渴望的信息。很难知道什么时候停止。你可以快速得出结论，你可以通过链接通过Link AD Infinitum链接继续链接......你总是等待最接近一些完美信息的理想吗？而且，您知道，在互联网前的互联网环境中，您可以很快到达那个地方，而我可以互联网，我认为地平线很远，但你仍然渴望。我认为这是它的上瘾性质。
民族志的评论是一个神话般的（和短！）书。这是对民族造影解释的详细实践的一个很好的介绍;它也是一个非常思想挑衅思考，就互联网之后的民族教学专着的可能性，以及民族志的可能性评论。Lastly it is an experiment in “late ethnography” in which an explanation of a cultural event (Kahenga’ ritual exclusion and protection of Fabian’s house in the Katanga district) is conducted through memory, notes and sources, contrasted with the practice of writing history and used to shed light on the authority of ethnographies based in contemporary sources.
显然，我希望其他人也能有同样的想法，我也希望人们能在当前web 2.0、社交网络和互联网名人或者，任何可能是通过自由软件的镜头都可以用的东西。And maybe it might just convince a few people, scholars especially, that the moment of Free Software is definitely not over, and that there is some really incredible scholarship out there by people like Gabriella Coleman, Matt Ratto, Shay David, Casey O’Donell, Jelena Karanovic, Anita Chan, Samir Chopra and Scott Dexter, Jenny Cool, Allison Fish, David Hakken and Karl Hakken, Jeff Juris (my labelmate!), Bernhard Krieger, Karim Lakhani, James Leach, Siobhan O’Mahoney, Greg Vetter and许多其他的在这些话题。就像游戏领域的学术研究(由Rex代表)一样，自由软件领域的学术研究也构成了学术关注的主要焦点，并对其提出了质疑，这应该是理解最近过去和近期未来的基础。
经历了发布书籍的过程，就像一个人，I wish we could publish our books faster, and try to merge some of the timely but ill-considered insight of the blog-form with the deliberate and peer-reviewed caution of the book-form… but I’m nonetheless a committed modernist in that I think the book-form has a quality that no other form of communication has, and it has taken centuries for that quality to develop. Nonetheless, nothing lasts forever, and since this is a book about software, there are a few special things that I want readers to know about this book: 亚博国际登录入口→