On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 05:40:29 +0300 (EET DST)
Uri Bruck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Salk developed the vaccine for polio while working for a university. He 
> worked for a salary. The project was a joint project of several 
> universities, and obviously had funding. As for giving away the vaccine, 

Which just shows there are alternative models to fund scientific discovery.
The basic division used to be:
        * Academy: does basic research, is funded by public (taxes) and the
                   results are published and available to the public.
        * Industry: Implements what looks promising and fund development
                    by reaping the results of implementation.

The problem now is that every day the situation is more like:
        * Academy: still funded by public (taxes) and grants, but the results
                   are sold to the Industry to get more money.
        * Industry: hold monopoly "rights" both to the implementation and
                    to the ideas.

This new model has several flaws:
1. The public pays double price. Both to keep the academic system in place
   and than to buy the fruits of its research.
2. More importantly, as academic institutions are striving to make more money
   by selling their discoveries, they behave more like R&D departments
   of the industry. This is bad because the industry has (and should have)
   short term goals (to bring money in, to satisfy investors).
   If these criteria infiltrate the academic system (which is already happening)
   who will search in those long-term-and-not-so-promising directions?

----------------------------------------------------------------
Oron Peled                             Voice/Fax: +972-4-8228492
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                  http://www.actcom.co.il/~oron

Linux:  If you're not careful, you might actually learn something.
                -- Allen Wong

Attachment: msg20520/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to