From: jonwill (jonwill@erols.com)
Date: Wed May 19 1999 - 09:45:23 MDT
Anders Sandberg wrote:
> This is not just a matter of opinion or organisational theory,
> experience seems to have borne out that centrally planned research
> initiatives have been less efficient than free research (the obvious
> example is Soviet research, although the EU framework programs are
> looking more and more worrying too).
I would agree with the above statement. Yet a global research consortium that
monitors all such activity to help coordinate and guide all R&D efforts would
still be beneficial if structured correctly. It could be structured as a think
tank of experts in R&D who could offer input as to where public research funds
would be most beneficially spent, which advise should exceed the abilities of
politicians. Additionally, this think tank could facilitate the creation of a
comprehensive online clearinghouse of all public research information. The
Global Inventory Project at http://www.gip.int/en/noframes.htm seeks to
fulfill a similar type of clearinghouse role, but limited to Information Society
information only.
> It is better to have groups that independently select what to study
> and invest in, based on their knowledge (which they have a strong
> incentive to do the most with, since it is their money). Collaboration
> and avoiding duplication can be achieved in a decentralized fashion
> such as the current scientific networking or net databases of "who's doing
> what".
The profit motive as facilitated by the patent system promotes private research
efforts. It would be interesting if someone could devise a way to increase such
efforts. As to public funding I would agree that the more independent groups
that can be financed, the more likely we are to increase the knowledge base of
humanity.
Cheers,
Jon
http://users.erols.com/jonwill/R&D.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:45 MST