Quick dip: Free firefight; digital dumbness; scijourno conference; doctors that don't talk

What's been distracting me lately from the big story I really really need to finish writing ...

A splendid, rich fracas over Chris Anderson's Free, set off particularly by a pan from Malcolm Gladwell in the New Yorker. The net fairly exploded -- search, and ye shall find -- with many noting that a pot was calling a kettle black. E.g., Itâs like War of the Speakerâs Bureaus and a more gently titled but equally damning (to Gladwell) post by Anil Dash. ,And one young writer accused Anderson of being a feudal lord. Anderson himself has been remarkably unfiltered in his tweet-pointers to reviews, pointing to many that scorch him. Pick those up by visiting his Twitter page. (You needn't be a twitter user to get there or use the links.)

What else?

Vaughan Bell whacks the idea that computer use makes you stupid. See his post here or download the remarkably concise and convincing powerpoint of his talk.

Ed Yong has been tweeting seemingly most of the big meetup of sci journos in London. His tweet string makes a nice look at the conference. He's keeping this up even after being feted last night as "best newcomer" by the Brit Assn of Sci Journalists â and then tweeting his tipsy way home. Many other good tweets from the conference at the #wcsj twitter tag.

And with much health-care-reform attention being given to the savings to be had from collaborative medical care â that is, doctors actually communicating with each other about patients they're treating (here's a frightening example of what happens when they don't, KevinMd notes that such lack ofe communication also kills patients.

Now back to work.

More like this

Below the fold, you'll find a complete listing of all tweets from #SMWUSC, in reverse chronological order.
I'll try doing this now and then, maybe regularly, to gather the more notable tweets I get in my twitter feed.
A couple of weeks ago, there was a flurry of tweets, tagged with #sci140 hashtag on Twitter. What was that about? People were trying to summarize scientific papers in 140 characters or less.
You can now see what happens when you tweet something. Twitter has a web page that tells you how many "impressions" a tweet has, how many "Engagements" (any kind of click on your tweet) and, for convenience, the percentage of tweets with which your tweeps engaged.