One view, censored version, via DrugMonkey:
“People are still going on about the completely absurd idea of “opening” working lab notebooks by publishing them on the Web? Who wants to read someone else’s lab notebook? I want to see digested, processed, analysed data, with bad experiments thrown out. Maybe bloggers have the time to wade through the piles of xxxx in other people’s lab notebooks to find the meaningful nuggets, but working scientists do not. And if we are talking about publishing curated, analyzed datasets on the Web independently of peer-reviewed publication, well this ain’t a “notebook”, and calling it “Open Notebook” is stupid."
The other view (via The Quantum Pontiff):
“A topic of much discussion I see in the Science 2.0 world (it’s like the Renaissance, but with more Javascript!) is the idea of Open Notebook Science. In one version of Open Notebook Science, one simply opens up ones research notebook (or other equivalent) to outside access. For an example see Garrett Lisi’s research wiki. This is, of course, the grand ideal of science at its best: the question for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”
What is Open Notebook Science?
“…research already in progress is opened up to allow labs anywhere in the world to contribute experiments. The deeply networked nature of modern laboratories, and the brief down-time that all labs have between projects, make this concept quite feasible. Moreover, such distributed-collaborative research spreads new ideas and discoveries even faster, ultimately accelerating the scientific process.”
See also this posting at Nature Precedings, by Jean-Claude Bradley.