6 ms·

Australia has CSIRO (I'm a former employee), which is not quite the same but has had some big successes such as WiFi, seL4. From being on the inside for a shor

Australia has CSIRO (I'm a former employee), which is not quite the same but has had some big successes such as WiFi, seL4. From being on the inside for a short period of time, I've had a glimpse at just how hard this is. Projects come and go, getting killed for budgets, politics, etc etc The commitment and early vision, are very difficult to re-create. I'm most familiar with WiFi as I worked with one of the inventors. It was patented in 1992 based on research in radio-telescopes for detecting black holes, which had been done years earlier. If you think about what most computers were like, and what we were doing with them in 1992, WiFi would have made no sense. It would have made less sense when they started work on it. Most computers were desktops, you didn't take a laptop to get a latte (which was also just barely a common beverage). Most people didn't have the internet, so there wasn't much to connect to. Your computer didn't move, so why have it wireless. Mostly you'd connect to a printer, which was also huge, so may as well be wired. There was nothing you would do on the network which would use the speed that WiFi was capable of. It would be almost a decade before it would be somewhat useful, and not until 2008, with the arrival of smartphones that it was a necessity. So yes, I believe most countries should try to support a DARPA like environment. I don't believe most countries will be successful in their attempt.

ioseph 5y ago
I feel there is an enormous difference between DARPA and CSIRO primary the "D". How many incredible innovations has DARPA made that will never reach the public because they give a strategic advantage?
- pedalpete 5y ago
  Agreed, but in the context of governments hoping to clone DARPA success, it's more about the innovations than the "D" part.
- IncRnd 5y ago
  "The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), established in 1958, is an agency within the Department of Defense (DOD) responsible for catalyzing the development of technologies that maintain and advance the capabilities and technical superiority of the U.S. military." [1] [1] https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R45088.pdf Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: Overview and Issues for Congress
- grecy 5y ago
  I commented above, Australia have the Defence Science and Technology Organization (DSTO) which is the military version of the civilian CSIRO. I worked at DSTO for a year, really interesting stuff.
nl 5y ago
CSIRO is (generally speaking) basic research. DARPA will fund that too, but almost always only as part of a larger applied research project. DARPA project deliver working systems. DARPA projects are also always limited term, without renewals. That gives a deadline, which is different to most research agencies. (ex-PM for a research agency that worked with *ARPA here. Most of the non-DARPA US *ARPA agencies aren't as effective as DARPA itself though).
- pedalpete 5y ago
  CSIRO does "basic research", but depending on what department you are in, project terms are limited and projects are focused on finding a way out of the building. The projects I worked on were all on tight budgets and deadlines with the goal of finding a way to commercialize the research. That being said, I'm not a researcher and my job was finding/developing a commercialization path for existing research.
ggm 5y ago
I was CSIRO DIT in times gone past, 1988 timeframe. It was an amazing place to be. We were doing OSI work. Perhaps it's better that didn't go the distance :-) SEL is a modern miracle. The decision by the government to de-fund the work is a tragedy.
grecy 5y ago
I worked for DSTO, which is kind of the defence version of the CSIRO. Amazing place to work due to the large budgets and lack of any real pressure to deliver anything in particular in any timeframe. As you said some fantastic projects, but a lot of political budget decisions.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
phonon 5y ago
> If you think about what most computers were like, and what we were doing with them in 1992, WiFi would have made no sense. It would have made less sense when they started work on it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNUcFMCIzw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNUcFMCIzw
japanuspus 5y ago
> If you think about what most computers were like, and what we were doing with them in 1992, WiFi would have made no sense. It would have made less sense when they started work on it. In 1998 I was setting up a shared internet connection in the apartment block I lived in. I remember wondering if I should go for a bundle of ethernet cables in the stairway or this newfangled WiFi thing. Neither I nor anyone else in the block had ever tried WiFi, and I believe it was still a few years before I did. Went for the cables - and it ran without a hickup for all the time I lived there. Nobody else used the connection much so student-me ended up with an insanely fast 512kbps at 1/10 the price.
suifbwish 5y ago
The thing most people don’t get is that wifi reflects off the human skin and goes through walls so guess what. Yup that’s right. You are visible through your walls from hundreds of feed away. It’s kind of a problem.
- suifbwish 5y ago
  Oh and your phone? It’s like you are holding a flashlight as long as it’s wifi is on. The tech for this hasn’t hit mainstream yet
- exporectomy 5y ago
  Not really, because we have rule of law. There are plenty of illegal ways to spy on people's private activity and we cope. If there's a hillside in view of your house, somebody can hide in the bush with a telephoto lens to watch you cooking dinner. Various active radar type technologies can see through walls. There are ways to pick up sound from a distance. Last I heard, this seeing people with Wifi was very poor resolution and filled with noise but worst of all, the system had to be trained on the specific rooms it was being used on so you couldn't apply it secretly.
  - world_peace42 5y ago
    It's completely bonkers to claim that "rule of law" in the US protects our privacy from any type of digital intrusion. "cope" might be the right word if you mean "completely ignore/obseqiuously accept our lack of privacy".
    - exporectomy 5y ago
      Hackers on the internet are lawless because they're in Russia or wherever, but somebody looking through your walls with wifi will be personally present in your street where he's at risk of being caught so it's a completely different kind of risk.
      - suifbwish 5y ago
gilbetron 5y ago
Wifi made tons of sense and everyone was desperate for wireless connections, cables were a pain and it was obvious that laptops were going to be a big thing. It was easy to imagine because it's basically: cellphones+laptops = awesome.

ioseph 5y ago

I feel there is an enormous difference between DARPA and CSIRO primary the "D". How many incredible innovations has DARPA made that will never reach the public because they give a strategic advantage?

pedalpete 5y ago
Agreed, but in the context of governments hoping to clone DARPA success, it's more about the innovations than the "D" part.
IncRnd 5y ago
"The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), established in 1958, is an agency within the Department of Defense (DOD) responsible for catalyzing the development of technologies that maintain and advance the capabilities and technical superiority of the U.S. military." [1] [1] https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R45088.pdf Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: Overview and Issues for Congress
grecy 5y ago
I commented above, Australia have the Defence Science and Technology Organization (DSTO) which is the military version of the civilian CSIRO. I worked at DSTO for a year, really interesting stuff.

nl 5y ago

CSIRO is (generally speaking) basic research. DARPA will fund that too, but almost always only as part of a larger applied research project. DARPA project deliver working systems. DARPA projects are also always limited term, without renewals. That gives a deadline, which is different to most research agencies. (ex-PM for a research agency that worked with *ARPA here. Most of the non-DARPA US *ARPA agencies aren't as effective as DARPA itself though).

pedalpete 5y ago
CSIRO does "basic research", but depending on what department you are in, project terms are limited and projects are focused on finding a way out of the building. The projects I worked on were all on tight budgets and deadlines with the goal of finding a way to commercialize the research. That being said, I'm not a researcher and my job was finding/developing a commercialization path for existing research.

ggm 5y ago

I was CSIRO DIT in times gone past, 1988 timeframe. It was an amazing place to be. We were doing OSI work. Perhaps it's better that didn't go the distance :-) SEL is a modern miracle. The decision by the government to de-fund the work is a tragedy.

grecy 5y ago

I worked for DSTO, which is kind of the defence version of the CSIRO. Amazing place to work due to the large budgets and lack of any real pressure to deliver anything in particular in any timeframe. As you said some fantastic projects, but a lot of political budget decisions.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

phonon 5y ago

> If you think about what most computers were like, and what we were doing with them in 1992, WiFi would have made no sense. It would have made less sense when they started work on it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNUcFMCIzw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNUcFMCIzw

japanuspus 5y ago

> If you think about what most computers were like, and what we were doing with them in 1992, WiFi would have made no sense. It would have made less sense when they started work on it. In 1998 I was setting up a shared internet connection in the apartment block I lived in. I remember wondering if I should go for a bundle of ethernet cables in the stairway or this newfangled WiFi thing. Neither I nor anyone else in the block had ever tried WiFi, and I believe it was still a few years before I did. Went for the cables - and it ran without a hickup for all the time I lived there. Nobody else used the connection much so student-me ended up with an insanely fast 512kbps at 1/10 the price.

suifbwish 5y ago

The thing most people don’t get is that wifi reflects off the human skin and goes through walls so guess what. Yup that’s right. You are visible through your walls from hundreds of feed away. It’s kind of a problem.

suifbwish 5y ago
Oh and your phone? It’s like you are holding a flashlight as long as it’s wifi is on. The tech for this hasn’t hit mainstream yet
exporectomy 5y ago
Not really, because we have rule of law. There are plenty of illegal ways to spy on people's private activity and we cope. If there's a hillside in view of your house, somebody can hide in the bush with a telephoto lens to watch you cooking dinner. Various active radar type technologies can see through walls. There are ways to pick up sound from a distance. Last I heard, this seeing people with Wifi was very poor resolution and filled with noise but worst of all, the system had to be trained on the specific rooms it was being used on so you couldn't apply it secretly.
- world_peace42 5y ago
  It's completely bonkers to claim that "rule of law" in the US protects our privacy from any type of digital intrusion. "cope" might be the right word if you mean "completely ignore/obseqiuously accept our lack of privacy".
  - exporectomy 5y ago
    Hackers on the internet are lawless because they're in Russia or wherever, but somebody looking through your walls with wifi will be personally present in your street where he's at risk of being caught so it's a completely different kind of risk.
    - suifbwish 5y ago

gilbetron 5y ago

Wifi made tons of sense and everyone was desperate for wireless connections, cables were a pain and it was obvious that laptops were going to be a big thing. It was easy to imagine because it's basically: cellphones+laptops = awesome.