Software is not medicine, not philosophy, it's able to be grown and thrive: why don't we try to achieve higher synergy and tech transfer?
-
-
Replying to @cmeik
(I feel this point of view is so foreign but it's literally my goal as a PhD student: increasing tech transfer and collaboration.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmeik
CRDTs would be *nowhere* if it wasn't for Basho implementing and providing their ORSWOT to the world.
@russelldb@seancribbs2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @cmeik
There's people still today implementing the Basho ORSWOT: there are better designs out there, but they showed the world a transferable tech.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmeik
As academics, we need libraries, collaboration, centralized tech, reusable platforms. We're not each building our own LHC, are we?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cmeik
Maybe, if software was way more expensive to build, it would be different. But, the cheap costs incentivize this behaviour.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Good software is expensive to build. It's cheap software built cheaply that's the problem, and shit choices are increasing...
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.