@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... ah yes, good point, I was mixing up the two. I think I've seen in the past papers in the ACM DL with the native HTML output, but it's certainly not universal.

@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... AFAIU it is not a web-based PDF reader. It's a web version of the paper, generated natively from the latex markup (via features of the ACM latex class). I wouldn't say it's a great UX, yet, but I do see the point: PDF is a terrible format for anything other than paper printing. So I appreciate that ACM is trying to move past it for scientific publishing.

@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... the most interesting part for me personally was indeed the misalignment (for the most part) between beliefs documented in the literature and reality.

Notwithstanding that, of course, we are not the first to raise the specific alarm about Docker not being a reproducibility silver bullet. The more, the merrier!

There is also a lot to say about the impact of technology hype on science (remember the early Docker days?), but it'll be for another day...

@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... in addition to that, I often see the expression "european open source that" used to mean that a significant part of the developer base is/should be located in EU (professional or not is irrelevant here). And investing in that is a perfectly worthwhile strategic goal for the EU.