tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post31475543134412637..comments2024-03-28T22:45:34.599-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Have U.S. R & D expenditures declined?David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger29125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-53724858211279365722015-11-04T15:47:59.307-08:002015-11-04T15:47:59.307-08:00Just quippin'Just quippin'Tony Fiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14578160528746657971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-71324062622346525162015-11-04T12:24:07.198-08:002015-11-04T12:24:07.198-08:00Aw Tony, you are spoiled. This site is relatively...Aw Tony, you are spoiled. This site is relatively spam n troll free. Given my personality, I am at a loss to explain why...<br /><br />onward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-27427206387081502652015-11-04T03:39:06.940-08:002015-11-04T03:39:06.940-08:00Nice blog.
Shame about the spamNice blog.<br />Shame about the spamTony Fiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14578160528746657971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-84604024187917450742015-11-03T18:17:54.722-08:002015-11-03T18:17:54.722-08:00A theoretical physics institute which funded beer ...A theoretical physics institute which funded beer <br /><br />http://perimeterinstitute.ca/videos/science-pub-how-does-science-workAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-59940728973841624442015-11-03T14:21:39.732-08:002015-11-03T14:21:39.732-08:00A beer company which funded theoretical physics
h...A beer company which funded theoretical physics<br /><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsberg_Group<br /><br />S Jensennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-62102700312808357882015-11-03T13:48:49.032-08:002015-11-03T13:48:49.032-08:00Catfish N. Cod,
I understand, and I agree that mo...Catfish N. Cod,<br /><br />I understand, and I agree that more brains is better. I also agree that basic research frequently doesn't bear fruit right away. This makes it a very good candidate for public funds, as public funds are best used for those things that do not (immediately certainly, and sometime never) show monetary profits.<br /><br />Our esteemed host often goes on about exceptions. In this case, it appears he's saying that corporate R&D does not create seed corn. That's a pretty absolute statement. And it's incorrect. It may not do so often. It may not do so as often as public research. It may even be disinclined to do so. But it does happen.<br /><br />Personally, for example, I do think we should have a colony on the moon. Not just because we can (though it's expensive), but because of the research possibilities.<br /><br />An awful lot of what we take for granted today is a result of the 60's space programs, and we could probably get as much out of a moon colony.<br /><br />I am both amused and disheartened at the irony of seeing fora filled with comments decrying research spending in favor social programs. And I'm generally in favor of social programs. But they are only a stopgap, albeit an essential one.<br /><br />Very like Dr. Brin's characterizations of the soviet economy, if you stop forward progress, you will slide back. But I will disagree that an entrepreneurial caste somehow must be capitalist.<br /><br />But even then, there are those of us who can't help but move forward.raitonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-9582931403336089982015-11-03T12:42:04.952-08:002015-11-03T12:42:04.952-08:00I thought this was interesting:
How Democrats supp...I thought this was interesting:<br /><a href="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-democrats-suppress-the-vote/" rel="nofollow">How Democrats suppress the vote</a><br /><br />Democrats are more likely to favor special elections for things like school boards. This means the vote is more likely to be skewed by blocks of voters that really care, because it is an inconvenience.sociotardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11697154298087412934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-34798352369189617182015-11-03T12:06:39.028-08:002015-11-03T12:06:39.028-08:00Meanwhile Republicans are building up the number o...Meanwhile Republicans are building up the number of poor without assistance, and calling it victory.<br /><br />http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/business/economy/a-strategy-to-ignore-poverty.html?_r=0<br /><br />Grease up the tumbrels... A.F. Reynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-37801979984827452332015-11-03T11:20:00.368-08:002015-11-03T11:20:00.368-08:00@raito: I apologize for using that term. I was usi...@raito: I apologize for using that term. I was using it as shorthand for a more general principle, i.e., that the more people that know of the existence of a tool or concept, the more uses and improvement will be found for the tool or concept. Simply put, if you apply more brains and more perspectives, you get more output -- though the benefit/brain ratio varies widely.<br /><br />I am glad the patent system worked properly for your case, but there are many instances in which -- if the corporation has no present use for the invention -- the item is labeled "trade secret" and dropped in a dark warehouse. Patents are only filed if the product is intended to see the light of day. These vaults are kept against the day, decades later, when a use is found for the product, or it becomes economically feasible or advantageous -- in the judgement of the owner. The difference is that mathematical concepts sit in an open vault accessible to anyone who can comprehend them; other tools, inventions, etc. are not always so lucky.<br /><br />Even if we grant your assessment, it is still the case that public R&D has a higher seed/harvest ratio than corporate R&D. 'Tis the nature of the beast. Rare is the situation where, say, a beer company funds theoretical physics.Catfish N. Codnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-92188311558733331582015-11-03T08:57:29.555-08:002015-11-03T08:57:29.555-08:00Lessig is abandoning his run for president. Good r...Lessig is abandoning his run for president. Good riddance to a bad actor. His vanity run was a great big joke. Hope he sells a few books as like many on the Republican side this appears to have been his motive. matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17757867868731829206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-9368807221666421002015-11-03T08:42:43.152-08:002015-11-03T08:42:43.152-08:00Rather than being 'a bug', the relationshi...<br />Rather than being 'a bug', the relationship between Eternal Warfare & Modern Science is a feature.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-10030701938369487642015-11-03T08:37:32.759-08:002015-11-03T08:37:32.759-08:00From electronic components & nuclear power to ...<br /><br />From electronic components & nuclear power to penicillin & that 10-day weather forecast of which David is so proud, the link between Federal R & D spending on Science and Internecine Warfare is indisputable, so much so that Brian Martin argues that the the very structure of the modern scientific community is military in nature, especially when it comes to federal R & D funding:<br /><br />"The orientation of modern scientists to the requirements of the state is evident, especially during the two world wars. In World War One scientists clamoured to be able to devote their talents to war-making on behalf of the state in which they found themselves. In World War Two the scientific community was thoroughly mobilised to serve the state for military ends, and this led to the continuing close connection between science and the state in the following decades. The organisation of modern science into a professionalised, bureaucratic form can be seen as a shaping of science into the image of other state bureaucracies. Scientists are no longer independent of the state: they depend on it for funding, professional status, and scientific priorities. The bureaucratic organisation of science puts scientists and the results of scientific research at the beck and call of state elites, including the power elites of science, who are well known to inhabit the corridors of state power as well. The power elites of science are simply another part of the administrative class which has so often benefited from and promoted the war system".<br /><br />http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/83Birch.html<br /><br />Insomuch as they fail to recognise the intrinsic link between modern science and a hierarchical military command structure, even the most well-intentioned scientists like David inadvertently bolster, promote & perpetuate the very war-mongering oligarchic elite (and the very socioeconomic military industrial complex) that they superficially condemn, turn the international science-mediated war machine against there own citizenry (in an effort to maintain 'military discipline', no less) AND condemn their own children to a future of militarized servitude.<br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-85907641320714361112015-11-03T08:28:05.480-08:002015-11-03T08:28:05.480-08:00In the case I'm thinking of, the patent system...In the case I'm thinking of, the patent system is working as intended. Indeed, that company grew significantly on the basis of one specific patent. Now, it's expired, and every major (and some minor) player have begun producing products based on it.<br /><br />It may not be the most common case, but the original post makes a statement that is definitive, and incorrect as I read it.<br /><br />And Linus is wrong about all bugs being shallow, even if the source is publicly available. It is my experience that open source developers only work on what scratches their itch, regardless of what work would benefit their users. In fact, I get told over and over that the projects exist to attract developers, not users. This is true even for corporate open-source developers, except that the itch they scratch is their employer's.raitonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82771458365552349372015-11-03T07:35:41.278-08:002015-11-03T07:35:41.278-08:00@raito: The problem with private seed corn is that...@raito: The problem with private seed corn is that they have no incentive to release to public -- but the privacy prevents Linus' law ("all bugs are shallow") from operating. So private seed corn is much more likely to sit and rot than public seed corn.<br /><br />@ Dr. Brin: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The claims regarding "redress for colonization" are easily verified -- though it must be pointed out that Chinese rhetoric in this vein has long been aimed at promoting solidarity with post-colonial countries (primarily Africa) which hold similar, and better justified, beliefs. (Aside from avoiding direct sovereignty issues, it's not clear to me what distinguishes Chinese intervention in Africa.) It is also widely understood that China has a higher opinion of itself than other nations; also understandable. "Cattle", though, that's another level of racist/nationalist rhetoric, and quite inflammatory. I can't count that as anything more than rumor-mongering without data. Catfish N. Codnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1923849867433142472015-11-02T08:20:16.832-08:002015-11-02T08:20:16.832-08:00Be careful of that 'corporate' tag. While ...Be careful of that 'corporate' tag. While it may be true for the publicly-traded, it certainly isn't true for all corporations.<br /><br />Most of the companies I've worked for in a professional capacity have left some rather important seed corn lying around. Then again, they've been exclusively private.raitonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-64532842992961285312015-11-02T00:29:15.228-08:002015-11-02T00:29:15.228-08:00Pardon me if I don't hold my breath waiting fo...Pardon me if I don't hold my breath waiting for SkyTran to eventuate.<br /><br />(I exhaled over Moller's SkyCar ages ago. That did, at least, have some plausible sounding engineering specs behind it)Tony Fiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14578160528746657971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-46663279137190748032015-11-01T18:53:47.234-08:002015-11-01T18:53:47.234-08:00Interesting that "Redress for colonization&qu... Interesting that "Redress for colonization" shows up in a discussion of R&D, China was subjected to (Limited) colonization because their government disliked innovation. If Chinese creativity had not been leashed for so long, their relationship with the British empire would have been much more equal. One wonders what we may stand to lose in the United States if R&D is pared down to pay for the contemporary equivalent of stone river boats.Tim H.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-10730133113605247192015-11-01T14:16:29.386-08:002015-11-01T14:16:29.386-08:00https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=echZPz4Pmig
SkyTra...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=echZPz4Pmig<br />SkyTran, individualized pods for commuters. I'd like a small battery and wheels to drive the one mile to my house. (The current light rail station would be the place.)Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-70180370085811820602015-11-01T11:08:31.304-08:002015-11-01T11:08:31.304-08:00Jumper during the USSR, investments in computers l...Jumper during the USSR, investments in computers languished because they believed that analytical (calculus etc) methods will always be more efficient than numerical crunching. This is true is a very basic sense, in that a good analytic tool can then make subsequent iterative algorithms much better. Hence the moral of your story. But in fact, brute force works so well that the Russians were left in a cloud of dust.<br /><br />Anyone who thinks that off-the-books (lying) wartime accounting is anywhere near as bad (by orders of magnitude) today as it was under either Bush is a proved dope. Likewise casualty rates. But goppers do not believe in numbers. Four dead in Benghazi is far, far worse than the thousands we lost to terror under GWBush.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-16717250238954778772015-11-01T11:05:15.655-08:002015-11-01T11:05:15.655-08:00I think he has been living too long alone in the w...I think he has been living too long alone in the woods with only a computer as a companion. He should get out and see the real world.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-13602462015327341542015-11-01T08:52:02.574-08:002015-11-01T08:52:02.574-08:00Feel free to move to the woods any time. No steel ...Feel free to move to the woods any time. No steel knives for you!Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-91250304843607407272015-11-01T07:39:41.536-08:002015-11-01T07:39:41.536-08:00Since the (US) Federal R & D budget correlates...<br />Since the (US) Federal R & D budget correlates (to the point of causation) with War Footing & Military Conflict*, those progressives who demand an increase in Federal R & D expenditures are demanding (in effect) what Orwell described as 'a perpetual state of war'.<br /><br />Like David, they desire a false, bloodless, 'kinder & gentler' and a 'fair & open' type of (eternal) competitive War, one that will bring out humanity's 'best' without an association with our worst, yet this is only possible if this 'fair and open' competition remains a light-hearted 'game' lacking in any real, material or economic consequence, for it is these real, material & economic consequences that bring out our competitive worst (a predisposition to cheating)in which "Winning isn’t everything; it’s the only thing".<br /><br /> War, huh yeah<br /> What is it good for?<br /> Absolutely EVERYTHING, oh hoh, oh<br /> From driving Human Progress, funding NASA**,<br /> And driving technological R & D, say it again.<br /><br />*http://www.hamiltonproject.org/assets/legacy/images/uploads/thp_image_uploads/charts/R_D_spending.PNG<br /><br />**http://www.penny4nasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/NASABudgetGraph.png<br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-41894004260241511422015-11-01T06:50:58.573-08:002015-11-01T06:50:58.573-08:00http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/1...http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/can-government-function-without-privacy/413419/<br />Argument that some opacity in government is best preserved.<br /><br />"Consider also that the Constitution of the United States was written behind closed doors, with its authors sworn to secrecy, and that the notes of the debates were not released for 50 years."Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-9808482620335397592015-11-01T06:11:54.094-08:002015-11-01T06:11:54.094-08:00I discussed funding "pure math" with a f...I discussed funding "pure math" with a friend. He had doubts. Luckily a math teacher was present who backed up my assertion: that sometimes the payoff took over a hundred years, but it happened. That someone in science or industry would find some inexplicable numbers and some math-versed person would say "Hey! That looks like a series from Dirichlet of 1850!" or some such, and the problem is unwrapped. The math teacher verified that this sort of thing happens often. (Then the senior professor at the mathematician's university publishes, and gets the credit, I joked!)Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-73793422124053459342015-11-01T05:30:56.939-08:002015-11-01T05:30:56.939-08:00...from when spamming was simpler....from when spamming was simpler.Tony Fiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14578160528746657971noreply@blogger.com