7 ms·
> Eisenhower didn't pay 100 labs $5M each to come with possible ballistic missile design Uh, ok, if that's what you want to do I guess academia isn't the right
by svara 6y ago
> Eisenhower didn't pay 100 labs $5M each to come with possible ballistic missile design
Uh, ok, if that's what you want to do I guess academia isn't the right place.
Pretty odd example though. You might as well have chosen some of the 20th century academic scientist who discovered, I don't know, relativity, quantum mechanics, the genetic code, the neural action potential or synaptic transmission to make the opposite point.
Is it likely to be among these people? No. But that's what motivates people in academia, rather than bombing Moscow.
- mam2 6y agoYour examples are only ideas, he is talking about actual systems. In fact his points still stands for the actual experiments that validated the most recent advances in relativity and quantum mechanics..
- andrepd 6y agoWhich experiments are those? I can't think of one foundational experiment in modern physics (>20th c.) that was developed in industry rather than academia.
- sriku 6y agoMuch of the work on realising quantum computers seems.to be happening in industry, no?
- mam2 6y agoThe point of op is that you need a lot of money at the same place to make great things happens, and that's mostly in industry. Large colliders for example were only possible because of that. I didn't say it was not possible in academia, just that money is in industry...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- svara 6y ago> Your examples are only ideas, he is talking about actual systems. Yes, exactly, that's the distinction between engineering and foundational research. Academia is for the latter. The examples that I quoted have arguably had more impact on civilization than any single engineering project, because they define what engineering can even be. There's a separate (and IMO more interesting) discussion to be had about why many academics feel like they're not contributing to highly relevant foundational advances. But this thread right here just seems like a big misunderstanding about what academia is.
- marcus_holmes 6y agoThere's a story that an academic was telling the world that heavier-than-air flight was impossible at the same time that the Wright brothers flew the first plane. Not all engineering advances are based on science, often the engineering comes first. Physics has been stuck in a quagmire for 50+ years. The "foundational research" hasn't moved, possibly since Einstein (who only became an academic after publishing his important work). Meanwhile the engineers have done awesome things. The impact on civilisation from string theory: zip The impact on civilisation from the internet: huge I'm not sure what foundational advances you mean, but the impact is definitely on the engineering side for the last 100 years.
- mellosouls 6y agoThe internet and the web both came out of public/gov funded organisations with fundamental academic ties. I think there is some dubious domain claiming in these industry vs academia anecdotes.
- marcus_holmes 6y agoOK, but only partially. The invention of IP protocol and HTML happened as byproducts of government-funded projects (they were certainly never invented to be what they are). Since then all the impact (and further development) has happened because of things deliberately developed by industry.
- 6y ago
- mellosouls 6y agoThere haven't been recent (significant) advances in relativity or quantum mechanics.
- inglor_cz 6y agoNot the OP, but instead of "bombing Moscow", try "designing and building a reusable space rocket". A similar task, but much nobler intentions. This is exactly what SpaceX pulled off, and cheaply so. No wonder that they are a magnet for young engineering talent, even with their insane workaholic corporate culture.
- pmiller2 6y agoYou also have to keep in mind that SpaceX pulled this off 40 years after NASA created the Space Shuttle. I'm not sure if that invalidates the example per se, but it seems a little like giving Apple credit for inventing the modern GUI, when they basically took it from Xerox PARC.
- mellosouls 6y agoYeah, and that whole walking on the moon thing. This "Industry, industry über alles!" chest beating is very unconvincing.
- inglor_cz 6y agoSaturn V was a huge feat, but Apollo program consumed about 2 per cent of American GDP in 1965. This is not a trivial cost. In fact, the nation was so unwilling to carry it on, that Apollo ended and the last footprints on the Moon will soon be fifty years old. Doing things affordably is a huge, huge leap for mankind (to paraphrase Armstrong). Look, for example, at healthcare. A cancer treatment that costs 1 million USD may be theoretically revolutionary, but out of reach of most people. Drive the cost down to 15 thousand, now that is a real revolution from the point of view of a regular Joe.
- mellosouls 6y agoYes - I absolutely agree there is a place for industry, the market and competition; I just find the superiority argument misplaced.
- 6y ago