Interesting People mailing list archives

FYI: letter to Business Week editor or how soon they forget


From: David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 13:55:15 -0400

To: David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
From: Sharon Eisner Gillett <sharoneg () victory-research com>


David,


Thought you would want to see the letter below that I just sent to the
editors of BW:


****
I was dismayed to find factual errors and shallow analysis, uncharacteristic
of your fine magazine, in your May 26 story, "What Price Science?"  The
article claims, for example, that Intel "came up blank" when asked for
examples of how basic research paid off for them. Huh?  Perhaps the answer
is just too obvious: Intel's entire business, microchips, would not exist
today without the invention of the transistor -- a product of basic
research.  Further, the article states that the Internet was developed
without much basic research.  In fact, the National Science Foundation's
role as Internet "matchmaker" in the mid-1980's was only possible because of
technologies and competencies developed during the preceding decade through
basic research programs, in particular those funded by the Advanced Research
Projects Agency of the U.S. Department of Defense.


In the debate over efficiency, let us not lose commitment to this key point
of consensus: by any measure, the societal ROI from basic research is immense.


Sharon Eisner Gillett
Principal, Victory Research, and Research Affiliate, MIT Sloan School of
Management


****
Here's the Internet-specific part of the article that I'm referring to:


"A research team led by Georgia Tech's Roessner found that in three
cases--reaction injection molding (used in plastics manufacture), magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI), and the Internet -- new technology did not flow
directly from breakthroughs in basic science.  In developing the Internet,
for instance,  the National Science Foundation played the role of
matchmaker, putting together diverse collections of people and technologies
without spending much on actual research."


I would be curious to know what the GT study actually says.


OK to send this to IP if you deem appropriate.


Regards,
Sharon


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sharon Eisner Gillett, sharoneg () victory-research com, (617) 253-3865
Research Affiliate, Center for Coordination Science, E40-181
MIT Sloan School of Management, One Amherst Street
Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------


Current thread: