Minbari technology development

[bakana]

but money isn't the main reason.

Been to Office Depot lately? Seen the posters telling you that You can donate supplies to the local schools because the Education Budget has been Cut? Again.


Oh, and here's another Textbook story. This one shows just how Religious Politics is interfering with Education:

Textbook debate in Texas over sex education
Battle over birth-control references has national implications

By Bethany Thomas - Reporter - NBC News Updated: 10:32 p.m. ET July 21, 2004

DALLAS - Of the four state high school health textbooks under consideration in Texas this summer, one says teenagers should ôget plenty of restö if they want to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.
It also suggests students can help prevent pregnancies by respecting themselves.
The book avoids any discussion of condoms.

Abstinence is the preferred practice in two more submitted textbooks, which only vaguely refer to ôbarrier protection,ö but never explain exactly what that term means.

Texas Textbook Story



Oh, BTW, do you Really think that the people assigned to make sure the Next Generation is well enough educated to make sure all of us have a safe, comfortable retirement doesn't deserve to be well paid?

It's as important a job as there is.

Of course, I suspect Most teachers would trade Salary for Respect.
Too many people in this country give Teaching about the same level of respect they give to driving a garbage truck.

[Dr Maturin]

<<Cut that education budget. Require lots of stuff that has nothing to do with Education and lots to do with keeping paper pushers busy.>>

I think most teachers are highly overpaid, and in some places, sponsors pay for football and other sports programs. They get their logo on the scoreboard or what not. I don't think money is at the core...it's accountability. My wife went to school in South-Central LA. She said the classes were a joke because the teachers didn't have any authority over the students, even in elementary school. Education is a clusterfuck, but money isn't the main reason.

[bakana]

There is, and always has been, a strong anti-intellectual strain in US society, and this is typified by such statements as Jesse Helms's "it is not the government's job to subsidize satisfaction of intelectual curiousity" (or words to that effect). However, this is a view that luckily is more common among the populace than among its leaders.

Judging by what most of our "Leaders" DO, as opposed to what they say to get Elected, most of our politicians would very Much prefer a nice, dumb, obedient, barely educated population. Everybody except Their Own kids.

Cut that education budget. Require lots of stuff that has nothing to do with Education and lots to do with keeping paper pushers busy.

Get rid of Art & Music programs. Them Science Geeks don't need any lab stuff. They can "larn" that in College. (If their parents can afford to send them) But, Never, Ever, Ever meddle with the Football budget. <FeH>

How do you tell when a Politician is Lying?
Read his Lips.

[Dr Maturin]

<<However, this is a view that luckily is more common among the populace than among its leaders.>>

Why?

[Capt.Montoya]

On the "Bad Soy" article you linked, bakana:

It has several mistakes, one cup of soy milk is 240 g of mostly water, if you add the carbs, protein and fats it contains it's about 20 g. of soy material, well within the quoted ranges consumed in Asia...

Textured soy protein, for example, is made by forcing defatted soy flour through a machine called an extruder under conditions of such extreme heat and pressure that the very structure of the soy protein is changed.

I have used some processes of extreme heat and pressure that change the very structure of meat protein... a pressure cooker.
Seriously, any kind of cooking changes the structure of proteins, and those changes actually tend to make them more digestible. That seems a non-issue to me. The article also tries to make it seem like extrusion is a terrible technique, but is simply a name for making a material go through a die or nozzle by the use of pressure (everytime you squeeze your toothpaste tube you're extruding...). Extrusion technology is applied in many other foodstuffs (cheetos and other snacks for example). That whole paragraph only amounts to fearmongering.
Where it says that FASEB "decreed" that soy protein was safe only as an adhesive it's wrong in that FASEB can not decree anything, it's an independent organization, only the FDA could "decree" if a product is safe. Also: a report that is now 25 years old can't be trusted as the definitive reference for this.

There are more mistakes, some minor, some serious, but I won't go further. The article raises interesting questions, but is not scientifically rigurous, it is very selective on the literature it quotes, and I can't consider it proof of your point.

It shows something the general public sometimes doesn't realize: in Science many answers are not definitive but "to the extent of our current knowledge."
It's an ongoing process, an asymptotic approximation to the absolute truth.



Good points grumbler.
I'll add that the distinction between "pure science" and applied research is not that sharp... insisting on it is another kind of intellectual ellitism.
You could point to extremes, but most research falls in the middle. Sometimes an "applied research" project will lead to "pure science" when the researchers realize that more basic knowledge is needed, sometimes the search for basic knowledge will lead to applications not foreseen at the beginning.
That's why research is fun and important.

[grumbler]

I think the growth in the percentage of university research in the US that is funded by corporations is causing some to confuse that with a decrease in the level of federal research funding, which isn't happening.

What is happening is that the total amount of university research in the US is increasing. Most of the growth is due to corporate funding (because so many more corporations have realized that they have to have a strong technology base as well as an engineering one) but federal funding for basic research has also increased.

There is, and always has been, a strong anti-intellectual strain in US society, and this is typified by such statements as Jesse Helms's "it is not the government's job to subsidize satisfaction of intelectual curiousity" (or words to that effect). However, this is a view that luckily is more common among the populace than among its leaders.

Science, of course, DOES include research with a known goal. To argue otherwise is merely some kind of intellectual elitism. Basic reseach has the goal of understanding something better, and advanced research has the goal of discovering applications for principals discovered in basic research. Those trying to find a cure for cancer, for instance, are engaged in science with a known goal. Those trying to understand dark matter are as well.

[bakana]

I'm afraid that most of what you are talking about is more Engineering than Science.

Research which has a Known Goal isn't really Science.

Science is when the researcher has no Idea whether his experiment will yield a profitable product or a "Gee, that's Nifty, what's it good for?"

In the Long Term, that sort of Pure Research almost alway pays off. It's just that "Gee, that's Nifty" stuff sometimes has to sit around for a few years before anybody figures out a way to make a Useful product out of it.

Add to that the "Research" designed to "Prove" what the drug, tobacco & "food product" companies Marketing & Legal depts. want the public to believe and Science is in Trouble.

Check out this site for a nice example of how Corporate Junk Science influences our lives:

Soy!, Bad Soy!

Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America's Favorite Health Food

[Dr Maturin]

The megacorp I work for has it's own huge college (named after the company's founder) at the university here in town and funds numerous projects and hundreds if not thousands of scholarships to our employees. I'd get one, but you have to go to school full time and seeing as how I sometimes work 40-60 days straight, that just ain't happening. But if I go to the University of Phoenix Online, "full time" may not be more than a few hours a week. I am currently talking to a counselor there over the phone a few days a week, trying to work out the money issue.

And as for the tech development...the war on terror is bringing about some innovations and some improvements. I believe the plans for the new field combat suit has been sped up and will be in wide use by 2017. This thing is awesome...the solider looks like Snake Eyes from GI Joe, and the armor is impervious to bullets without using Kevlar. It stiffens when strongly impacted.

[Capt.Montoya]

Bakana:
You forget (or ignore) that a large portion (maybe most) of the research budget in the USA comes from the government: the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health are the largest, NASA also funds way too many projects in many universities. Several state governments also have funding for research projects.
There is still a lot of "scholarly pursuit" research at universities, however many Universities are also becoming more business savy and looking into opportunities to commercialize patents and technology derived from research by the faculty (and the ever important graduate students and post-doctoral researchers that do the actual work and much of the conceiving and developing of ideas).

There are also non-profit foundations (in many cases established by philanthropists) that fund research projects.
And some companies also fund research at universities, mostly looking for solutions to, and understanding of, specific problems for which their in-house research arms do not have the needed expertise.

You're right that most CEOs don't look for the long term, but don't forget that some companies base their growth on innovation and research and development (3M, Dupont, Apple, Intel, many pharmaceutical companies)...

Corporations that have their intelectual property protected only as trade secret and not patented run the risk of their secrets being revealed by reverse engineering (a legal process) or by industrial espionage (illegal, of course), thus they do patent many things (not "everything" is a trade secret), this gives them protection for twenty years, if anyone else wants to use their process they have to pay royalties, after the patent expires anyone can use the technology without paying a fee (this is why it takes years for generic equivalents to many brand medicines). In that case corporations actually do contribute to the exchange of scientific information... not immediately, but they do. You also have to consider that in many cases the research that results in a patent also leads to papers in scientific journals (but only after the patent has been submitted).

Z'ha'dum Dweller is correct, the creation of intellectual property by research is a way in which many corporations have become rich... and they won't mind that some patents expire, because by the time they do they may have a patent in a newer an improved process and keep their technological advantage.

I know this because I just finished graduate studies, the projects in my research group had funding from several of the above federal, state and private funding agencies, several projects which I witnessed or contributed to on campus led to patents which are being transferred to start-up companies (the University will get royalties from them). Also, several recent thesis on campus were financed by a corporation... they patented the results too.

ZHD is also right that war drives technological innovation, the USA of WW II is a great example, the USA then took a great move in continuing the trend and push to do research after the war...

Let me remark that I do not think that the progress of science is slowing down. Actually if you were to measure the current progress of research on Earth by the amount of funding and the number of journals and papers published the growth is steady or accelerating...

I was just speculating that the idea of the "end of science" could be an ad hoc explanation for the slower development of the Minbari.

Now with further discussion I think it's more likely that, compared to the other young races, they were simply so advanced militarily and technologically that they didn't feel the pressure to push further so fast.

[Dr Maturin]

<<I actually agree that most technological development comes from commercial factors, from competition>>

...and war.

[Dr Maturin]

<<What on Earth (or not) is a Plutocrat ?

Surely not a burocrat from Pluto ?>>

A plutocracy is a government ruled by the rich, so a plutocrat is a member of the plutocracy. The US is not a plutocracy; it is a representative democratic republic.

[Bonehead]

Ok, I dont mind admitting this thead has gone way beyond me.

What on Earth (or not) is a Plutocrat ?

Surely not a burocrat from Pluto ?

[Dr Maturin]

<<It's not that Science has slowed down. It's that the plutocrats have choked off funding.>>

Except that these "plutocrats" became rich this way. It's a mill ticket.

[bakana]

The problem in Education is that, under corporate "leadership" science education is being Guttted.

Universities used to conduct research as a "Scholarly" pursuit. Big corporations don't like that model because they don't always control the Patents.

So, CEOs work to create funding policies for universities that discourage Science, believing that they can control it better in their Own labs where the corporation is guaranteed to own the patents.

And, of course, they also classify Everything as a "Trade Secret" so the exchange of scientific information is choked off. This results in duplication of effort and slows the pace of research considerably.

The problem with this way of doing things is that True Science doesn't come with any sort of Guarantee. Genuine research might take Years to pay off and no CEO these days looks much past the next couple quarters. A Year is too long for these hogs, they want Results. Now. Get that new product on the Market so I can get a big Bonus before I raid the comjpany bank account and head for Jamaica.

Since Science can't be Done on the short term, this results in endless tweaks of the Same Old, Same Old, engineering instead of Science.

It's not that Science has slowed down. It's that the plutocrats have choked off funding. After all, that money for new Science equipment would look So Much Better in My Bank Account. <Fe>

[Capt.Montoya]

That's a shame with science education... but not a surprise about the books.
If you have noticed, a large percentage of graduate students in science and engineering in the USA are foreigners, the current pace of research can't be sustained with US nationals alone. This does not necessarily mean that basic science education is better in other countries, but is good enough to allow foreigners to compete for positions in graduate programs that are inexistent or of lower quality in their nations.


I'll say that science and technology are interdependent in their development and is a fine line, several technological developments have come from "pure" science without a specific commercial drive behind, but will go along with defining "technology" as "applied science."

I actually agree that most technological development comes from commercial factors, from competition... that could be another reason why Minbar wasn't too fast to develop technology, they were on top among the young races and not very interested in selling their technology to the others.