I lived through some Bell Labs history and have a different perspective, particularly about anti-trust. 1) It was the corporate labs that expected long-term dominance of a broad field that could afford to place big bets and capture most of the return. 1/2
-
-
-
Yes, he makes this point (if I’m understanding you correctly) in section 5.1.1!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Trend will continue if Academia evaluates and hires scientists based on publications. Reward system should be modified to: measurable societal improvement as a product of scientific advancement.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@ProfAroraAshish has thought more about this topic than almost anyone else. Also worth checking out his other writing to better understand how innovation happens through the lens of econ/startegy.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Pocketed
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Do you have a dominant info discovery channel? Twitter digging? Or forwarded to you by friends/colleagues? I’m very curious about finding the written equivalents of great music (subjective, I know...) with sub-1000 play count.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Disagree. The future economy will rely on science to grow it. We will need to master systems to be financially sound.
@prediabetesedu working towards reducing insulin need in healthcare, will boost an economy out of insurance. When science is respected, economy will improve. -
But, yes, it will only be made possible through technology. The tech is useless if we don’t know how to use it. Obvi.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
