On Dec 5, 8:21*am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 4, 3:02 pm, "JB" 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.........

Mike
My point is that IF the work of Universities is to be published it
should be open source
instead of giving it to a private entity. I see no point in preventing
oversite by the public at large
from seeing how their taxes are being spent. The fruits of our taxes
should not be channelled off
to prevent private institutions from going bankrupt. Private
companies can always, and do, have their own Rand D
if they want totally privacy for commercial reasons. PARTIAL funding
does not give them the right to the same
privacy. As the pool of engineers get smaller so does the disemination
of scientific information,.
Is that what America really want for the future?

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

My point is that IF the work of Universities is to be published it
should be open source
instead of giving it to a private entity.

but many universities ARE private entities. And if private funds are used
for research, or funds from industry sponsors are used, then there should be
no doubt that the funder's should decide what gets published and what they
keep private.

I see no point in preventing
oversite by the public at large
from seeing how their taxes are being spent.

have you actually gone to a public university and asked for access to their
library where such things are normally archived? personally i don't think i
need to pay to have everything done at a public university published for the
world. that would be a bigger expense than the research is actually worth
in many cases.

As the pool of engineers get smaller so does the disemination
of scientific information,.

Engineers are NOT scientists. Engineers design things that perform specific
functions, they may solve practical problems, but they are NOT the ones
doing most of the basic research type of work. At my last job they wanted
to change my job title from 'Engineer' to 'Scientist', this was a place that
DID perform research that was funded by industry, most of which was kept
private for use by the funders. I refused the job title change because I
preferred to do the practical stuff and make products for the customers that
did something useful instead of the research and experimentation and writing
reports.

On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 08:55:55 -0800 (PST), Art Unwin
wrote:

I see no point in preventing
oversite by the public at large
from seeing how their taxes are being spent.

I wonder how long that sentiment would last if we demanded full
disclosure and retention of patent rights from those on the dole who
claim they are inventors?

* * * * T I L T !!!! * * * *

The question becomes: Are you willing to pay back your social
security to the taxpayers who support you?

Knowing how that answer will be evaded, avoided, denied, dismissed
(each or all with manufactured outrage suited to this Soap Opera), no,
you won't. As Perot used to say, "That dog don't hunt!"

As such, the status quo will be maintained and inventors on the dole
will keep their dignity and professors will keep their research.
Equilibrium! ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:21 am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 4, 3:02 pm, "JB" 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.........

Mike
My point is that IF the work of Universities is to be published it
should be open source
instead of giving it to a private entity. I see no point in preventing
oversite by the public at large
from seeing how their taxes are being spent. The fruits of our taxes
should not be channelled off
to prevent private institutions from going bankrupt. Private
companies can always, and do, have their own Rand D
if they want totally privacy for commercial reasons.

Hi Art, not saying that I disagree with your sentiments, but the
paradigm shifted, and we allowed it to happen.

Bell labs is a good (bad?) example of just what happened:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs

Is an interesting reference, you really should read it.

They sure came up with a lot of interesting innovations and inventions.

But what is telling is the last two sentences of the article:

Start quote

As of July 2008, however, only four scientists remained in physics basic research
according to a report by the scientific journal Nature.[4]

On August 28, 2008, Alcatel-Lucent announced it was pulling out of basic science,
material physics, and semiconductor research, and it will instead focus on more
immediately marketable areas including networking, high-speed electronics,
wireless networks, nanotechnology and software.[5]

End quote

No doubt their next quarter profits will look good. Or did. They'll have
to find something for an encore to increase the profits next quarter.
But for companies that rely on innovation and invention, they are eating
their seed corn.


- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Dec 8, 12:07*pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:21 am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 4, 3:02 pm, "JB" 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.........

Mike
My point is that IF the work of Universities is to be published it
should be open source
instead of giving it to a private entity. I see no point in preventing
oversite by the public at large
from seeing how their taxes are being spent. The fruits of our taxes
should not be channelled off
to prevent private institutions from going bankrupt. *Private
companies can always, and do, *have their own Rand D
if they want totally privacy for commercial reasons.

Hi Art, not saying that I disagree with your sentiments, but the
paradigm shifted, and we allowed it to happen.

Bell labs is a good (bad?) example of just what happened:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs

Is an interesting reference, you really should read it.

They sure came up with a lot of interesting innovations and inventions.

But what is telling is the last two sentences of the article:

Start quote

As of July 2008, however, only four scientists remained in physics basic research
according to a report by the scientific journal Nature.[4]

On August 28, 2008, Alcatel-Lucent announced it was pulling out of basic science,
material physics, and semiconductor research, and it will instead focus on more
immediately marketable areas including networking, high-speed electronics,
wireless networks, nanotechnology and software.[5]

End quote

No doubt their next quarter profits will look good. Or did. They'll have
to find something for an encore to increase the profits next quarter.
But for companies that rely on innovation and invention, they are eating
their seed corn.

* * * * - 73 de Mike N3LI -

Mike,
I see no end to the present trend. A few decades ago GE here in
Bloomington started moving its manufacturing products overseas
only later to sell as they moved away from manufacturing and into cash
handling businesses such as banking, tv and the like..
Bloomington had a couple of plants making vacuum cleaners, they
moved out to Mexico. Beich's candy was sold to a Swiss company
Also had a major switch yard on the railroad which is now a waste
land.Result We paid for Mitsubishi to settle here to make cars.
Insurance companies got bigger here churning money and now import
Indian software people as they state american programmers do niot come
up to
par. The city commerce department encouraged hotels to be built
together with the import of 10K mexican workerst6o keep them clean and
hospitals became larger as immigrant births ballooned as insurance
against deportation which then increased taxes for bilingual
education.
All this because we moved away from letting the existing market
decide as we went global knowing that american ingenuity was the
answer to all.
Now Universities are getting failing grades thro out the country where
their products were intended to be the savior of capatalism which has
now changed
as entrepreneurs changed the "market" instead of strengthening the
infro structure. Now the motor industry wants feed money to continue
to build cars
with high labor content that cannot compete. So the idea of let the
"market" decide has now also disapeared as we nationalise/take over
our industries.
Americas answer? Pull away from the dissemination of science and try
to remold the World (market) to match our needs. Suppression of the
meagre results in universities is such a small dent in the overall
picture. But all knew what the total end effect would be. History
shows that all that seek an empire
always over estimate their abilities to retain what their military had
won such that another new empire emerges.To increase market size while
decreasing
population wealth eventually only leads to total domination or
widespead civil strife.
Greed is a terrible thing
Pull up the ladder Jack. To heck with the others i'm O.K. and that's
the most important thing for today. Tomorrow is another day

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Dec 8, 12:07 pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:21 am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 4, 3:02 pm, "JB" 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.........

Mike
My point is that IF the work of Universities is to be published it
should be open source
instead of giving it to a private entity. I see no point in preventing
oversite by the public at large
from seeing how their taxes are being spent. The fruits of our taxes
should not be channelled off
to prevent private institutions from going bankrupt. Private
companies can always, and do, have their own Rand D
if they want totally privacy for commercial reasons.

Hi Art, not saying that I disagree with your sentiments, but the
paradigm shifted, and we allowed it to happen.

Bell labs is a good (bad?) example of just what happened:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs

Is an interesting reference, you really should read it.

They sure came up with a lot of interesting innovations and inventions.

But what is telling is the last two sentences of the article:

Start quote

As of July 2008, however, only four scientists remained in physics
basic research
according to a report by the scientific journal Nature.[4]

On August 28, 2008, Alcatel-Lucent announced it was pulling out of
basic science,
material physics, and semiconductor research, and it will instead focus
on more
immediately marketable areas including networking, high-speed
electronics,
wireless networks, nanotechnology and software.[5]

End quote

No doubt their next quarter profits will look good. Or did. They'll have
to find something for an encore to increase the profits next quarter.
But for companies that rely on innovation and invention, they are eating
their seed corn.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Mike,
I see no end to the present trend. A few decades ago GE here in
Bloomington started moving its manufacturing products overseas
only later to sell as they moved away from manufacturing and into cash
handling businesses such as banking, tv and the like..
Bloomington had a couple of plants making vacuum cleaners, they
moved out to Mexico. Beich's candy was sold to a Swiss company
Also had a major switch yard on the railroad which is now a waste
land.Result We paid for Mitsubishi to settle here to make cars.
Insurance companies got bigger here churning money and now import
Indian software people as they state american programmers do niot come
up to
par. The city commerce department encouraged hotels to be built
together with the import of 10K mexican workerst6o keep them clean and
hospitals became larger as immigrant births ballooned as insurance
against deportation which then increased taxes for bilingual
education.
All this because we moved away from letting the existing market
decide as we went global knowing that american ingenuity was the
answer to all.
Now Universities are getting failing grades thro out the country where
their products were intended to be the savior of capatalism which has
now changed
as entrepreneurs changed the "market" instead of strengthening the
infro structure. Now the motor industry wants feed money to continue
to build cars
with high labor content that cannot compete. So the idea of let the
"market" decide has now also disapeared as we nationalise/take over
our industries.
Americas answer? Pull away from the dissemination of science and try
to remold the World (market) to match our needs. Suppression of the
meagre results in universities is such a small dent in the overall
picture. But all knew what the total end effect would be. History
shows that all that seek an empire
always over estimate their abilities to retain what their military had
won such that another new empire emerges.To increase market size while
decreasing
population wealth eventually only leads to total domination or
widespead civil strife.
Greed is a terrible thing
Pull up the ladder Jack. To heck with the others i'm O.K. and that's
the most important thing for today. Tomorrow is another day


For real. We continue to do this to ourselves.
Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVkjCQCTOEI

I'm not saying he's right, or that we should MAKE him right, only that this
is the perspective of someone who somehow has an interest in looking into
it.

On Dec 8, 3:13*pm, "JB" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On Dec 8, 12:07 pm, Michael Coslo wrote:



Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:21 am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 4, 3:02 pm, "JB" 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.

Art Unwin wrote:

...
Look at the bright side Mike, The majority of this group feel O.K.
with things as they are,
and they represent the smarts of the USA of the past 50 years. Where
every thing worth while was discovered
thus lessening the need for further education plus strengthening the
right to bear arms..........for wild animals ofcourse grin
The cities will have their crystal nights ofcourse as they have done
in the past in L.A. against those that hoarded the wealth,

Actually, the technical aspects and military-ization of our police has
changed the terrain. Now you need the equiv or road-side-bombs used in
Iraq, flame throwers to burn them in their Kevlar, armor piercing
ammunition, small surface to surface missiles, etc. ... not impossible,
just more difficult.

We now need a civilian group to oversee the
president/government--perhaps one which is militia based would be
appropriate. It certainly is time this surfaces to the realm of
rational discussion ... they are no longer OUR servants! We simply have
to get their attention and focus back ...

Regards,
JS

On Dec 8, 5:43*pm, John Smith wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
...
Look at the bright side Mike, The majority of this group feel O.K.
with things as they are,
and they represent the smarts of the USA of the past 50 years. Where
every thing worth while was discovered
thus lessening the need for further education plus strengthening the
right to bear arms..........for wild animals ofcourse grin
The cities will have their crystal nights ofcourse as they have done
in the past in L.A. against those that hoarded the wealth,

Actually, the technical aspects and military-ization of our police has
changed the terrain. *Now you need the equiv or road-side-bombs used in
Iraq, flame throwers to burn them in their Kevlar, armor piercing
ammunition, small surface to surface missiles, etc. ... not impossible,
just more difficult.

We now need a civilian group to oversee the
president/government--perhaps one which is militia based would be
appropriate. *It certainly is time this surfaces to the realm of
rational discussion ... they are no longer OUR servants! *We simply have
to get their attention and focus back ...

Regards,
JS

I suppose in the cities you have different views of the police but
without money
they then become part of the public, good or otherwise as in New
Orleans,
On the other hand gun sales are sky rocketing in the Midwest so one
can shoot deer I suppose
and I can't see Obama saying "let the public eat cake". On the other
side of the coin, if the public is
not paid enough to buy the products that they make it becomes a
question of living or dying, your choice!
Do you think that hams will come to the aid of the government in a
case of crisis?
I think we should let this thread die before we are accused of
sedition
Regards
Art