Re: information suppression by universities

Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 4, 3:02 pm, "JB" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So, you're a legend in your own mind. Your reactivity by the way
indicates

No, actually not. However, as your text indicates, I "AM SOMETHING" you
don't see in your ghetto, thanks for the "heads-up." People DO tend to
be a product of their environment ... again, reflected in your text.
Regards,
JS
Environment's no excuse for bad behavior, but it is often the case. Maybe
you haven't seen any miracles in yours. They can be found even amongst
great turmoil and evil. Try to get out of your comfort zone and travel
some, even spend some time in other cultures. Jails of Mexico, Beverly
Hills, anywhere. It can be a better teacher than the classroom. I can pray
that you're eyes be opened to what you can't see.

What on Earth is going on here? So you have a conflict?
What do you both want of each other so this can be put aside
if you so wish?
The subject was that many technical people are getting laid off.
This removes them from access to public university white papers.
After a year or so they will be encouraged to look for a alternative
career
They then find that that University white papers are not open source
to facilitate recomended change
Universities widen the Rust Belt towards both coasts. Universities
decline in services without public funds
Universities react and recruit teachers from India to prevent furthur
spread of the Rust Belt but efforts to late.
America becomes the latest Empire to bite the dust as a Mexican
becomes P=resident and encourages change
over from corn to hemp and all are happy overnight. The audacity of
hope fades away.

Phew! Stop to catch your breath Art. 8^)

Actually, I wondered what this thread was all about.

So I'll bite.

Much of what is out there is free for all.

But the source of the money for research is often from companies who are using the research to enhance their companies position in the marketplace.

Now we can discuss how much of a public university is actually public, and whether or not it should all be public or not, but the background has shifted.

Once upon a time, industry funded an amount of their assets toward research. As time went on, some folks decided that that research money was wasted, and was better spent giving back to the shareholders. That was a smart move - if you couldn't see past the end of your nose.

So after it was seen that wrecking your R and D department was a great way to become a technological backwater, they started looking for a less expensive way to get research done. The answer was the universities. So here we are. We can argue about whether or not it should be all open source or not, but from industries perspective, not having the research open to all makes sense.

Needless to say, a one paragraph dissertation of the situation is necessarily truncated as all hell....

Not to say one way is better than any other, although personally, I kind of liked the older paradigm of company based R and D. But the new method sends money to the universities.

- 73 de Mike N3LI - da village idiot.........
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is free software good for developers?
    ... Even though many Open Source products are zero cost, ... I don't think the idealists are necessarily the biggest concern in the ... In the music industry, the listener can distinguish ... of a song to know if they would spend money. ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: Any experience with "The Last One"?
    ... >>making software to be given away, or software of such low quality or ... Open Source programmers fully expect to earn money by ... - Gerry Quinn ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Open Source vs. Commercial
    ... There are two arguments that are repeatedly used to attack the Open Source model - that it can't produce high quality software, and that it destroys the economy of software. ... Some people, and one in particular on Borland newsgroups, consistently claim that since Open Source software is also Free, it will destroy the software market and render all professional programmers unemployed. ... The assumption behind the argument that "FOSS = no software market" is that FOSS is made only by unpaid amateurs. ... The development cost a lot of money, which made the deal very expensive for the customers. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: LPC900/80C51 Compiler Toolchain
    ... There are some situations where commercial developers have advantages over open source developers - it is often easier to get restricted information from the microcontroller manufacturers. ... no top-quality open source alternatives (sdcc is, as far as I understand it, a perfectly reasonable compiler - but it is not a top-ranking 8-bit compiler in the same way that gcc is for many 32-bit targets). ... Any serious embedded developer can tell you horror stories of fights with licenses, ranging from broken hardware dongles, lost licenses after hard disk crashes or changing network cards, confusions over licensing policies resulting in waste time and money, long waits for license codes, issues when transferring the software to another computer, and other such problems. ... more manufacturers are going straight for a gcc port for newer 32-bit architectures, rather than the more traditional approach of working closely with a commercial developer. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: WARNING TO MY ILLEGAL CLONE!!!!!
    ... I hope I got as much money as you guys. ... I bite with poisonous priests, ... posting in the internet as PONG944 with email address at domain PINOY.US ...
    (soc.culture.filipino)
Loading