Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
LONDON RIOTS
Posts
Max McGee
View playlists
Close
author=Max McGee
hahahahahahahahahaha
oh rmn i need a drink
I started this halfway through the first page. C'mon and pull up a chair, I ain't done yet.
It's just shameful that people riot. Just be lucky tha6t you rioters live in a country like that and not the middle east.
Dyhalto
7536
FG, what you mentioned in your last post actually proves one of my points and doesn't address the other. It proves that scientific progress is better served by the private sector, and didn't reference our original discussion of public funding for private schooling.
I just thought you were implying that tuition fees are high because labs need it. Obviously I was wrong, and I'm glad for it because I felt like I was rebuttling a straw man argument =\
But you're wrong that "knowledge for the sake of knowledge" like "physics and math" is strictly not-for-profit. If your lab is in cooperation with the private sector and requires private funding, your lab itself is a private sector body; a business. It may be not-for-profit on the surface, with you and your Professors certainly not living the high life, but the reputation gained from discovering X+Y=Z reflects on the educational facilities of the University, which IS the for-profit venture.
That doesn't change the fact that, curtesy of unlimited public funding, the university's educational facility is free to charge whatever exhorbitant sum it feels it can from students. In fact, without that limitless cheque, your labratory might find itself getting more investment as the university feels the need to actually compete with other universities, and not just jack up rates for the same shit they offered last year.
I just thought you were implying that tuition fees are high because labs need it. Obviously I was wrong, and I'm glad for it because I felt like I was rebuttling a straw man argument =\
But you're wrong that "knowledge for the sake of knowledge" like "physics and math" is strictly not-for-profit. If your lab is in cooperation with the private sector and requires private funding, your lab itself is a private sector body; a business. It may be not-for-profit on the surface, with you and your Professors certainly not living the high life, but the reputation gained from discovering X+Y=Z reflects on the educational facilities of the University, which IS the for-profit venture.
That doesn't change the fact that, curtesy of unlimited public funding, the university's educational facility is free to charge whatever exhorbitant sum it feels it can from students. In fact, without that limitless cheque, your labratory might find itself getting more investment as the university feels the need to actually compete with other universities, and not just jack up rates for the same shit they offered last year.
Brent
0
author=Max McGee
hahahahahahahahahaha
oh rmn i need a drink
Max...you sure your not TFT in disguise? :O
About the riots, it would finally seem that the English admit that they express a basic social problem...............
Dyhalto
7536
FG, if your universities are "public", then why are people paying tuition to gain admission?
I can understand standardized testing and requirements, but barring people from entry due to financial situation? That's as ass backwards as Feudalism. And please don't argue "you don't have to pay back your loans" again. You should see the fallacy there by now.
How are you not seeing the connection between your lab and the private sector? Your lab has to balance it's books like any other organization. Your professors and project directors all collect a salary. Everybody earns a living. The lab can grow and expand, finance willing. All the money to do the above comes from a private company which has obviously preferred to outsource it's R&D to your lab instead of investing in the construction and maintenance of it's own. What exactly is "public" about this?
Oh, I suppose if you can't get enough private grants to pay the bills then the taxpayer will bail you out. After all, we have to keep the failed bankrupt institution going. But according to you, that's not a problem with your own university and lab. That's good.
But then, why are the UK headlines abuzz with skyrocketing tuition rates? Hmm...
edit : I just had a thought. If your universities are government-owned, and your student loan system is government-owned, then the government actually loans money to itself and you get saddled with the debt for whatever it charged itself. The level of Fucked-Upedness is hilarious looking at it from this side of the pond, though you may not see the humor.
Of course, the Bank of England is there to gets it's cut.
I can understand standardized testing and requirements, but barring people from entry due to financial situation? That's as ass backwards as Feudalism. And please don't argue "you don't have to pay back your loans" again. You should see the fallacy there by now.
author=Fallen-GrieverThis contradicts everything you said :\ Your own personal work is only possible because somebody interested in profit is sponsoring it.
What the company sponsoring us want to do is to take this enzyme and use it to produce a precursor for a drug in such a way that they can avoid a competitor's patent (or something like that - I couldn't care less). If it didn't have this possible use to them, they wouldn't be interested. They care about profit.
How are you not seeing the connection between your lab and the private sector? Your lab has to balance it's books like any other organization. Your professors and project directors all collect a salary. Everybody earns a living. The lab can grow and expand, finance willing. All the money to do the above comes from a private company which has obviously preferred to outsource it's R&D to your lab instead of investing in the construction and maintenance of it's own. What exactly is "public" about this?
Oh, I suppose if you can't get enough private grants to pay the bills then the taxpayer will bail you out. After all, we have to keep the failed bankrupt institution going. But according to you, that's not a problem with your own university and lab. That's good.
But then, why are the UK headlines abuzz with skyrocketing tuition rates? Hmm...
edit : I just had a thought. If your universities are government-owned, and your student loan system is government-owned, then the government actually loans money to itself and you get saddled with the debt for whatever it charged itself. The level of Fucked-Upedness is hilarious looking at it from this side of the pond, though you may not see the humor.
Of course, the Bank of England is there to gets it's cut.
1) the private sector does not provide all of the money.
2) academics that does not produce something profitable is not automatically a failure.
3) an academic research lab that does not produce something that is profitable is not a failed bankrupt institution
Furthermore, the private sector is very risk-averse. That aversion greatly reduces the amount of research and study that is done. The public sector steps in to cover the gap. And knowledge is power.
What part of this is fucked up?
That things *gasp* cost money? Or that you fail to see the value in academic research?
2) academics that does not produce something profitable is not automatically a failure.
3) an academic research lab that does not produce something that is profitable is not a failed bankrupt institution
Furthermore, the private sector is very risk-averse. That aversion greatly reduces the amount of research and study that is done. The public sector steps in to cover the gap. And knowledge is power.
What part of this is fucked up?
That things *gasp* cost money? Or that you fail to see the value in academic research?
Dyhalto
7536
I guess you didn't catch on to the "Fucked-Upedness" part. Hopefully somebody will. I don't want to be the only one who can see A, B, and C, then deduce D.
This comment is both ignorant and mean :(
That's like telling someone to invest in "stocks" or a nice place to live is "Europe". Everything on earth can be boiled down to case-by-case.
The trick for "academic research" is : What are you researching? Astrophysics and/or bacteriology, or pigs' orgasms?
If something is publically funded, it's given a blank cheque. If the lab can't find a private sector partner to provide additional financing and direction*, they'll have to make up stupid projects in order to justify not being downsized. During rough economic times, like now, partners may be hard to come by. FG may have his enzyme project, but the lab two blocks away may be forced to study ice cubes just to avoid cutbacks.
*By direction, I mean "Research this, please."
author=kentona
Or that you fail to see the value in academic research?
This comment is both ignorant and mean :(
That's like telling someone to invest in "stocks" or a nice place to live is "Europe". Everything on earth can be boiled down to case-by-case.
The trick for "academic research" is : What are you researching? Astrophysics and/or bacteriology, or pigs' orgasms?
If something is publically funded, it's given a blank cheque. If the lab can't find a private sector partner to provide additional financing and direction*, they'll have to make up stupid projects in order to justify not being downsized. During rough economic times, like now, partners may be hard to come by. FG may have his enzyme project, but the lab two blocks away may be forced to study ice cubes just to avoid cutbacks.
*By direction, I mean "Research this, please."
Government owns school. You would like to attend school. Government essentially offers payment plan for you to attend said school.
seems like an okay plan to me...maybe I am not seeing it right?
seems like an okay plan to me...maybe I am not seeing it right?
StarSkipp
2007
It's amazing how one offtopic comment sparks off a intellectual debate thats lasts for four pages :S
A general thing I've noticed on the forums is that no one is prepared to admit when they are wrong in a certain subject. Instead of deciding to make arguements go in circles, why can't someone hold up their hands and just say "Yes you're right, my opinion was based on mis-informed information/assumption. Fair debate good sir" =o=
A general thing I've noticed on the forums is that no one is prepared to admit when they are wrong in a certain subject. Instead of deciding to make arguements go in circles, why can't someone hold up their hands and just say "Yes you're right, my opinion was based on mis-informed information/assumption. Fair debate good sir" =o=
author=kentona
Furthermore, the private sector is very risk-averse.
This is wrong.
Are you talking about just in research? Or in general? Please explain.
author=Brentauthor=Max McGeeMax...you sure your not TFT in disguise? :O
hahahahahahahahahaha
oh rmn i need a drink
Go fuck yourself. Flaming is one thing but that was out of line.
FG, if your universities are "public", then why are people paying tuition to gain admission?
To cover the costs of operating the institution? Like paying teachers, maintaining buildings, and so forth?
author=harmonicI read about it in a few places now, over the years, in magazines like The Walrus and Scientific American. I don't really remember the details unfortunately.author=kentonaThis is wrong.
Furthermore, the private sector is very risk-averse.
Are you talking about just in research? Or in general? Please explain.
The gist is early-stage research is very risky, too risky for most corporations. So this is where the government comes in. Later-stage research is more attractive to private corporations, since the risk has lowered.
I google searched it, and found a paper about it. The abstract sums up my understanding of it:
Academia, the Private Sector, and the Process
of Innovation
Philippe Aghion
Harvard University and NBER
Mathias Dewatripont
Universite Libre de Bruxelles and CEPR
Jeremy C. Stein
Harvard University and NBER
February 9, 2005
Abstract
We develop a model that clari es the respective advantages and disad-
vantages of academic and private-sector research. Our model assumes full
protection of intellectual property rights at all stages of the development
process, and hence does not rely on lack of appropriability or spillovers to
generate a rationale for academic research. Instead, we focus on control-
rights considerations, and argue that the fundamental tradeo¤ between
academia and the private sector is one of creative control versus directed-
ness. By serving as a precommitment mechanism that allows scientists
to freely pursue their own interests, academia can be indispensable for
early-stage research. At the same time, the private sectors ability to
direct scientists towards higher-payo¤ activities makes it more attractive
for later-stage research.
EDIT:
the introduction seems interesting too!
Many important innovations, in industries ranging from pharmaceuticals to
computer technology, have their origins in publicly funded research conducted
at universities, foundations, and other non-pro t institutions. The traditional
case for government funding of such academic research is a familiar one: Be-
cause of knowledge spillovers and imperfect intellectual-property-rights (IPR)
protection, the economic value associated with certain kinds of ideas cannot
be fully appropriated by the developers of these ideas, leading to private-sector
underinvestment in basicresearch (Nelson (1959), Arrow (1962)).
...I might just read the rest of the paper.
EDIT EDIT:
The point is I am not just pulling this shit out of my ass, as you implied.
