Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!uunet!bionet!MCCLB0.MED.NYU.EDU!DEUSTACHIO From: DEUSTACHIO@MCCLB0.MED.NYU.EDU Newsgroups: bionet.users.addresses Subject: (none) Message-ID: Date: 2 Jan 91 22:32:00 GMT Sender: daemon@genbank.bio.net Lines: 58 This summarizes some private discussion between D'Eustachio and Kristofferson, set off by the latter's posting of 23 Dec90 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- D'E replied - Dave Kristofferson notes that the use of e-mail to transfer large files tends to overload a mechanism that was really intended for another, more limited purpose. He points out that Internet connections are far better suited to the purpose and analogizes the use of e-mail for file transfer to the use of archaic PCs for sequence analysis. This is true, but also counterproductive in one crucial way. A recurrent issue is that of getting biologists to make a serious and sustained effort to use the available computer tools to manipulate and analyze their data. The relevance of this? An Internet subscription, like a large PC or small workstation, costs tens of thousands of dollars, an amount of discretionary income that a typical NIH-funded researcher typically simply doesn't have at present. Institutional support as a source of relief? Not likely. The accounting figures I'm allowed to see suggest that my institution (which is probably typical) is just as hard pressed for discretionary funds as I am. Under the present circumstances, new equipment and contributions to help support new institutional resources simply aren't affordable, and experiments either get done the clunky old way or they don't get done at all. As a result, there's a real tension. On the one hand, out-of-date or inappropriate technology may be genuinely disruptive. (I think of an ex-technician who used Pipetmen for poking holes in things because Pipetmen were generally the pointed objects closest to hand.) On the other, the alternative right now may be not doing the job at all. And how are the people who need to become users of the new computer technologies to be brought in if, in addition to all of the barriers of habit and inertia, we add membership fees they just can't afford? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kr. responded - My only comments are the following: 1) I would not expect anyone to fund an Internet connection out of a single lab research grant. If institutional funds are not available, then I would advocate that departments look into submitting a request to the NSF. 2) I would expect that many universities have at least some computers connected to the Internet. Would it not be possible to ask someone in the computer science department to get the software for you? I realize that interdiscplinary communication is sometimes difficult, but I have also found that many computer scientists are looking for possible collaborations with biologists. Breaking the ice with such a small request might lead you to greater benefits in other areas. In the course of our work here, we have often found that biologists are not aware of resources already available on their own campus simply because they don't talk to anyone in computer science. If these avenues have been tried without success, then, of course, one is going to use BITNET FTP if that is the only possibility available. I would just hope that everyone in the same lab doesn't request their own personal copy of the file by mail 8-)!!