Slashdot Mirror


Modern Methods For Sharing Innovation

The New York Times is running a story about Johnny Chung Lee, a hardware hacker made famous for his projects which modified the Nintendo Wiimote to do things like positional head tracking and multi-touch display control. The article focuses on the suggestion that Lee's use of YouTube to demonstrate his innovations has done a better job of communicating his ideas than more traditional methods could. Quoting: "He might have published a paper that only a few dozen specialists would have read. A talk at a conference would have brought a slightly larger audience. In either case, it would have taken months for his ideas to reach others. Small wonder, then, that he maintains that posting to YouTube has been an essential part of his success as an inventor. 'Sharing an idea the right way is just as important as doing the work itself,' he says. 'If you create something but nobody knows, it's as if it never happened.'"

12 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. But Youtube will still be blocked anyway at work by fictionpuss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As someone who works in R&D I can absolutely agree.

    I stumbled across his valuable work in my own time though, since the Government of Canada blocks Youtube and other blog/social networking sites. Until workplaces and institutions relax/modernise internet policy usage, we won't be seeing the full benefit of these new methods of communication.

  2. Because of the Internet, everyone's an expert... by Anik315 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Internet has made innovation much easier. You just have to be willing to do the appropriate reading. There is clearly alot of innovation going on behind the scenes by ordinary people but no one knows about most of it and it makes it seem as if innovation is in decline. If technical journals made it easier for ordinary people to get published it might alleviate the situation somewhat.

  3. Re:Because of the Internet, everyone's an expert.. by fictionpuss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The innovation going on behind the scenes is trending to make the pay-per-view technical journals less relevant precisely because of their exclusionary nature which relies upon a monopoly on the accepted forms of professional communication.

  4. If you never see it, it never happened by Zerth · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And if they make me remember my registration, I'll never read their article.

  5. a picture is worth a thousand words... by the+positive+path+ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and a video is worth a million.

  6. Papers and seminars are useless by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every paper I've read and every talk I've been to has been nearly useless for reproducing the results. The author/speaker always glosses over some crucial component as though it were common knowledge. "Here we used a 4th Order Adaptive Runge-Kutta solver to integrate the following equations for fluid dynamics." "Um, excuse me, but do you have any source code for that solver?" "That's left as an exercise to the reader." Last time I checked, professors would give you a much lower grade if you didn't show your work.

    1. Re:Papers and seminars are useless by EaglemanBSA · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The reasons for this are less that they don't want to share the information, and more that you can't include such things in most papers because of page restrictions/time restrictions on the publication/presentation. It is usually assumed anyone _that_ interested would know how to plug these things into an RK4 (etc), so he can get on with what his work really means.

      That said, my solution to this has been to include a url with all my relevant source code in the references section of all the papers I've published. It's a professional way to include the information without having to deal with the publication's restrictions, and I wish I saw more of it, especially as journals go electronic and have no excuse for such small page limits.

      --
      Quiz: True or False -- On a scale of 1 to 10, what is your middle name?
    2. Re:Papers and seminars are useless by philspear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed. One 20 minute talk is not enough time to give details about how to do even the most basic of lab procedures needed to replicate results in biology. In many studies, one year of lab experience is not enough.

  7. Re:Who Needs Traditional Peer Review? by siride · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A little elitism is a good thing. You don't want just people making judgments in fields that they know little to nothing about. That's where you get pseudo-science and superstition.

  8. Re:Who Needs Traditional Peer Review? by Louis+Savain · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's where you get pseudo-science and superstition.

    Well, I want to be the judge of that. I refuse to let others make that decision for me. Freedom is the name of the game.

  9. Re:But Youtube will still be blocked anyway at wor by houstonbofh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When you find something work related at youtube, send a link to your boss. Do this often when you work from home. As management makes a business case for it, it will happen.

  10. Re:Who Needs Traditional Peer Review? by siride · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I thought scientific progress was the name of the game?