Slashdot Mirror


Bill Joy For New National CTO Post?

jddeluxe writes "In an article in today's NY Times, John Doerr of Kleiner-Perkins proffered up Bill Joy's name when queried by Barack Obama for a recommendation for the position of Chief Technology Officer of the Unites States which Obama has promised to create and that the country is overdue to have. I think that's a brilliant idea, and while you're at it, have the FCC report to him as well, why don't you?" If Bill is unavailable, I'll throw my hat in the ring, although I'm holding out for Secretary of Tubes.

58 of 393 comments (clear)

  1. vi by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 5, Funny

    Under Bill, vi will be the national standard. Yeah!!!

    --
    All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    1. Re:vi by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Funny

      Under Bill, vi will be the national standard. Yeah!!!

      If you ask me Bram Moolenaar would be an IMprovement over Bill.

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    2. Re:vi by pottymouth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes it's funny but it's funny because of the hint of truth. Which is exactly why you do not want a CTO at a government level. How easy is it to corrupt government officials? How many of them are idiots (ever heard Nancy Pelosi speak, wow... just, wow...)? Sure Bill Joy would be great but what if next election you get Bill Gates? Or Steve F'in Balmer? How about MS Windows being mandated for all government work because of ? How about letting the free market (no, not an MS monopoly that is, despite stories to the contrary, slowly slipping away...) decide what works best rather than some government appointee with an agenda (or a greedy streak).

      At worst deal with it at the state level so you can at least move if you don't like the way things are going.

      Don't laugh. Be afraid. Be very afraid...

      "Just clinging to my guns and religion..."

  2. Or... by Stile+65 · · Score: 5, Funny
    --
    I claim first use of "Error No. 0B" - or "No. 0B error." It'll be the new ID 10T!
  3. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While Stallman would make an excellent adviser to the National CTO, he's too much of a "Throw the baby out with the bathwater" kind of guy. While I agree with RMS most of the time, that kind of personality doesn't last long in US politics.

    --
    All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
  4. Thirteen Stripes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not eleven, not twelve, but thirteen. If you guys keep putting only 12 stripes on our flag, then the terrorists have won.

    1. Re:Thirteen Stripes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's ok, we're just disowning Georgia.

  5. Isn't he the pessimist? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I seem to recall Bill Joy having some decidedly pessimistic and even luddite attitudes towards future tech, but it's been so long since he's been in the news that I don't remember now what. Paranoid about nanotech, I think, for starters.

    1. Re:Isn't he the pessimist? by oneiros27 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're probably thinking about the 2000 article in Wired, 'Why the Future Doesn't Need Us', which he said in a 2003 interview was Wired's title, not his.. It was criticized in quite a few places, but there were plenty of people who gave merit to what he was saying.

      I think it's wise to understand that there are risks inherent to almost any solution, and no just adopt technology for technology's sake -- look at what happened with the election machines, and those damned flash splash pages in the late 90s. I probably need to re-read his article, as I can't remember most of it, but I don't remember it being as pessimistic as people made it out to be.

      --
      Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  6. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Believe in hoarding? You realise he made massive contributions to BSD, including the TCP/IP stack, which were released under a permissive license allowing anyone to use it?

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  7. Bill Joy's terrorist connection by pHatidic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the Republicans went crazy over Obama's friendship with Bill Ayers, just wait until they find out what Bill Joy said about Ted Kaczynski (the unibomber) in Wired.

    1. Re:Bill Joy's terrorist connection by chrb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You mean this?

      "I am no apologist for Kaczynski. His bombs killed three people during a 17-year terror campaign and wounded many others. One of his bombs gravely injured my friend David Gelernter, one of the most brilliant and visionary computer scientists of our time. Like many of my colleagues, I felt that I could easily have been the Unabomber's next target. Kaczynski's actions were murderous and, in my view, criminally insane. He is clearly a Luddite, but simply saying this does not dismiss his argument; as difficult as it is for me to acknowledge, I saw some merit in the reasoning in this single passage. I felt compelled to confront it."

      Bill Joy doesn't sound that out of line. If you're going to confront terrorists, you need to understand their doctrine and motivation so that you can discredit the entire philosophy, rather than just turn them into martyrs.

    2. Re:Bill Joy's terrorist connection by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're assuming that the context will be presented, or matter. Clearly, you've not paid attention the last few years.

  8. About time by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't it time we had someone in charge of evaluating new technologies who actually KNOWS how computers work, rather than having to refer to the opinions of out of touch people who still struggle with their VCR flashing 12:00 over and over since 1986?

    1. Re:About time by Bearhouse · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, a lot of the younger politicos would probably struggle with VCRs, since all they ever knew was iPod or TIVO. Makes them smart rather than dumb, in my opinion, (VCRs used to be a bitch to program).

      Do we really need people who know how things work 'under the hood' to make smart tech decisions? Or do we need smart people with vision, who then consult with or employ the right people? Not sure that Kennedy knew how the rockets worked, but he got people to the moon just the same.

      Now get off my lawn.

    2. Re:About time by Xtravar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anyone who can't program a VCR probably can't program much else, nor follows instructions very well. I agree with the OP.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
    3. Re:About time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The simple answer is BOTH. We've got 300 million people, surely we can find a few who have a reasonable amount of both technical competency and vision. One without the other to balance it is worse than useless.

  9. No need by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We don't need a national CTO. We can make our own technology decisions without the government telling us what to do.

    1. Re:No need by Deton8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Amen, brother. How about a national "Chief Keep the Fucking Government the Hell Out of our Way Officer"?

    2. Re:No need by CRCulver · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We don't need a national CTO. We can make our own technology decisions without the government telling us what to do.

      I think such things as the prevalence of spyware on PCs and the reluctance of many people to offer music or movie shares stands as proof that most people actually can't make their own technology decisions.

    3. Re:No need by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, because that approach has worked so well with the financial industry.

    4. Re:No need by gregoryb · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you think the government has been staying out of the financial industry for the past 70+ years, you haven't been paying attention.

    5. Re:No need by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Security through shit just plain not working in the first place? That's innovative, I like it.

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    6. Re:No need by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You dolt.

      The government has millions of computers, and you don't want someone to set policy? Look at what the mindless, out of control, dead in a ditch projects have cost us.

      They're not setting policy FOR YOU, nitwit-- for the government. DO what you want. Let someone put reason into executive branch decision making in government IT!!

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    7. Re:No need by visualight · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Paying attention? The unregulated market brought us the Great Depression 70 years ago and until Bush the markets stayed regulated. The _recent_ deregulation is why we're in the mess we're in now.

      There's no way you don't already realize this, I'm not sure why you posted what you did.

      --
      Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
    8. Re:No need by visualight · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's a flat out lie, mod parent down.

      The community reinvestment act was passed during the Carter Administration, and has nothing to with the FACT that lenders made unqualified loans KNOWING IN ADVANCE that those loans would be bundled and sold so that the originator was no longer directly on the hook for the potential (probable) loss.

      Deregulation allowed these criminals to get away with this.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/01/conservatives-seek-to-shi_n_131020.html

      --
      Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
    9. Re:No need by visualight · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bullshit. The people making these qualified loans knew full well that they were likely to default, they didn't care because they also knew the loans would be bundled and sold.

      NO ONE and NO LAW forced these people to make those loans.

      --
      Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
    10. Re:No need by visualight · · Score: 4, Informative

      It wasn't Bush, but it was deregulation and it was Championed by conservatives. The reason why you don't see it mentioned specifically might due to some embarrassment over the bill being signed by Bill Clinton in 1999.

      ----from wikipedia---
      Provisions that prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which passed the U.S. Senate in one form on a party-line vote of 54 (53 Republicans and 1 Democrat) to 44 (all Democrats) and on a 343-86 vote in a different form in the House of Representatives, before being resolved by a joint conference committee; the conference report was approved by both houses of Congress (Senate: 90-8-1, House: 362-57-15) and signed by President Bill Clinton.[2][3]
      --------------------

      And here is a thoughtful perspective on re-regulation from people you probably hate:
      http://www.aflcio.org/aboutus/thisistheaflcio/ecouncil/ec03052008a.cfm

      --
      Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
    11. Re:No need by viridari · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is a common misconception.

      Bush did nothing to deregulate the financial industry.

      He is a flaming chowderhead and guilty of high crimes against the people of the United States and the Constitution. But to be fair, this particular accusation doesn't stick.

    12. Re:No need by AshtangiMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No one in the government encouraged mortgage lenders to make the "liars loans" (loans with no effort to verify employment and income status), package them and re-market them as AAA securities on the international market. Listen to this (45 min or so).

    13. Re:No need by jcnnghm · · Score: 3, Informative

      BAKER (R-LA): It is indeed a very troubling report, but it is a report of extraordinary importance not only to those who wish to own a home, but as to the taxpayers of this country who would pay the cost of the cleanup of an enterprise failure. The analysis makes clear that more resources must be brought to bear to ensure the highest standards of conduct are not only required, but more importantly, they are actually met.

      WATERS (D-CA): Through nearly a dozen hearings where, frankly, we were trying to fix something that wasn't broke, Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines.

      MEEKS (D-NY): As well as the fact that I'm just pissed off at OFHEO, because if it wasn't for you, I don't think that we'd be here in the first place, and now the problem that we have and that we're faced with is: maybe some individuals who wanted to do away with GSEs in the first place, you've given them an excuse to try to have this forum so that we can talk about it and maybe change the, uh, the direction and the mission of what the GSEs had, which they've done a tremendous job. There's been nothing that was indicated that's wrong, you know, with Fannie Mae! Freddie Mac has come up on its own. And the question that then presents is the competence that -- that -- that -- that your agency uh, uh, with reference to, uh, uh, deciding and regulating these GSEs. Uh, and so, uh, I wish I could sit here and say that I'm not upset with you, but I am very upset because, you know, what you do is give -- you know, maybe giving any reason to, as Mr. Gonzales said, to give someone a heart surgery when they really don't need it.

      ROYCE (R-CA): In addition to our important oversight role in this committee, I hope that we will move swiftly to create a new regulatory structure for Fannie Mae, for Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks.

      CLAY (D-MO): This hearing is about the political lynching of Franklin Raines.

      FALCON (OFHEO Regulator to MEEKS (D-NY)): Sir, Congressman, OFHEO did not improperly apply accounting rules. Freddie Mac did. OFHEO did not fail to manage earnings properly. Freddie Mac did. So this isn't about the agency engaging in improper conduct. It's about Freddie Mac.

      SHAYS (R-CT): Fannie Mae has manipulated, in my judgment, OFHEO for years -- and for OFHEO to finally come out with a report as strong as it is, tells me that's got to be the minimum, not the maximum.

      FRANK (D-MA): ...etcetera. Uh, I -- This -- You -- you -- you seem to me saying, "Well, these are areas which could raise safety and soundness problems." I don't see anything in your report that raises safety and soundness problems.

      WATERS (D-CA): Under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines, everything in the 1992 has worked just fine. In fact, the GSEs have exceeded their housing goals. What we need to do today is to focus on the regulator, and this must be done in a manner so as not to impede their affordable housing mission, a mission that has seen innovation flourish from desktop underwriting to 100% loans.

      MANZULLO (R-IL): Mr. Raines, 1.1 million bonus and a $526,000 salary. Jamie Gorelick, $779,000 bonus on a salary of 567,000. This is -- what you state on page 11 is nothing less than -- than staggering. The 1998 earnings per share number turned out to be $3.23 and 9.mills, a result that Fannie Mae met the EPS maximum payout goal right down to the penny. Fannie Mae understood the rules and simply chose not to follow them. If Fannie Mae had followed the practices, there wouldn't have been a bonus that year.

      RAINES: Because banks don't -- there aren't any banks who only have multifamily and single-family loans. These assets are so riskless that their capital for holding them should be under 2%.

      CLINTON: The responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was president to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

      --
      You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
  10. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by zappepcs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This thread points out the problem of anointing one person as CTO. Hate to say it but this is one of those things that might do better with a board, not a leader. That is to say that while there may be a judge, it's the jury that counts. Using one man is not enough, even the SCOTUS has nine. When it's important enough to do something, it's important enough to do it right. RMS should probably be on the jury, along with other notable technology evangelists.

  11. BusinessWeek article by dnwq · · Score: 3, Informative
  12. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think RMS would even take it. Being in government requires adherence to a set of principles that many people end up finding reduces their ability to be principled. As an example, RMS would be required to back, in public, copyright law policies that he in private would vehemently disagree with. I just don't see RMS doing that, he's too much of a man of principle.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  13. We will fight! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Under Bill, vi will be the national standard. Yeah!!!

    There will be a revolt! We, the Emacs revolutionary council, will take up arms and fight to the death!

    1. Re:We will fight! by JustOK · · Score: 5, Funny

      isn't there a key board shortcut for that?

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    2. Re:We will fight! by rootofevil · · Score: 5, Funny

      i think its:

      ctrl-meta-shift-r alt-ctrl-p ctrl-' alt-meta-1 shift-2

      then recomplie without perl extensions.

      --
      turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
    3. Re:We will fight! by rthille · · Score: 4, Funny

      You GNU emacs losers have to type that, but us xemacs users have it bound by default to the letter 'a'.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    4. Re:We will fight! by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Funny

      and to type 'a', he has to hit:

      ctrl-meta-shift-pedal-cymbal {thump thump clap} we-will-we-will-rock-you

  14. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hear Hear...

    A board of 7. must have a mix of OSS and Closed source experts, as well as hardware experts.

    Experts... not some guy that was CTO for some corperation, I want people that are either leaders in IT technology, or people that made a difference.. Being able to Code or design is a requirement for the position. too many time I have seen CTO's that were promoted from the Sales department.

    Oh wait ,that will never happen... because it would be fair and balanced.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  15. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Alomex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just don't see RMS doing that, he's too much of a man of principle.

    It goes beyond that. Certain people define themselves as opposition, as being not-the-man, and as such are uncomfortable in any position of authority, even if their principles were in no way being challenged.

    These people serve a valuable role in society, but it is not within the corridors of power.

  16. This is a huge opportunity by Haig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The Obama administration may be the place where the driving of the golden spike uniting open source development with open source government takes place. Using Federal IT standards to drive proprietary formats out of the government departments will create a cascade of rationalization and standardization throughout the US economy. Our creaky and costly medical care system desperately needs this kind of rationalization.

    Accordingly, a prominent and effective member of the Open Source community should occupy this position, not a big-time software corporatist.

    1. Re:This is a huge opportunity by isaac · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Open source software didn't drive the economy of the 90's, or the economy of the last few years.

      Says you. In my professional experience over the last 10 years, Linux and Apache on commodity hardware have been integral in lowering barriers to entry for small companies and the cost of scaling for large ones.

      -Isaac

      --
      I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
  17. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  18. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bill Joy is also the guy who keeps warning of the end of the world if we don't stop developing various technologies. He wrote a number of articles and did a bunch of interviews about the world turning to gray goo if we don't kill nanotech research, how computers and weapons will kill us all, etc.

    He started work on a self-sufficient, solar powered sailboat, presumably his form of a bomb shelter for the coming techpocolypse.

    Basically, he has turned in to a crazy old coot.

  19. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, I know what you're saying also, but let me quote rs79, a /. oldtimer:

    Brian K. Reid. Everybody else is either too corrupt or too bizarre to actually do the job. Brian understands people, unlike most geek geniuses.

    Now, limiting the controlling input to such a function for the ENTIRE COUNTRY to one person is fraught with problems as illustrated by the quote above. Even one President is backed up by House, Senate, and SCOTUS. See, if it's important, there should be some checks and balances. Just the mere mention of M$ on this site is cause for a flamewar. How would a single CTO personage be able to deal with all the crap/politics/bribery/governmental interference and all that will come their way? Even the DoJ was not free from corruption. One person, without a jury behind them, will fall prey to special interests. It seems inevitable. The idea is right, perhaps even the execution of that idea will be, but I have doubts about a single person as head of that implementation.

  20. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by cthulu_mt · · Score: 4, Funny

    We need someone with real vision.

    I nominate Ray Kurzweil.

    --
    Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  21. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Lobster+Quadrille · · Score: 5, Funny

    He prefers to commune with the wild beastes. I'm pretty sure RMS is sasquatch.

    --
    "The cup is in turn designed for holding hot or cold liquids, and has an open rim and closed base." --US Patent #5425497
  22. Re:While we're at it by orclevegam · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Bruce Schneier perhaps?

    Nah, put him in charge of Homeland Security... then in 6 months when he dissolves it as "redundant and ineffectual" transfer him to the NSA working on crypto and shoring up our technology infrastructure. Could also put him in charge of the TSA for a bit to help streamline that down to something sane like it used to be and eliminate all the security theater.

    --
    Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
  23. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Jeff+Hornby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know how to break this to you but the position of National CTO isn't quite as important as the role of SCOTUS. Upholding the laws and constitutional freedoms of the citizenry is much more important than what IM client government employees wil be allowed to use.

    --
    Why doesn't Slashdot ever get slashdotted?
  24. Re:While we're at it by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 5, Funny

    My president (and Fox News) has taught me that it's more important that Americans "feel" secure than actually be secure. He just doesn't get that. You gotta listen to your gut on these things. He's too much of a thinker. Probably socialist, too.

    --
    the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
  25. Re:What the CTO needs... by MosesJones · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One of the first things that should be done is to mandate equal consideration for .NET and LAMP because Java has way too much of a fanboi following in the federal government.

    Of course the fact that the federal government has done research that finds that reducing the number of languages reduces costs has nothing to do with them preferring to pick a single standards based, multi-vendor approach. Nope its because they are "Fanboys" and that stuff in the military drones would be better done in LAMP than in Java...

    Federal Government uses LOADS of different technologies most of them are in the heavy lifting space rather than being about LAMP type areas (LAMP for Air Traffic Control?).

    Ah but you are just talking about websites, which is a single part of the estate and are of course not thinking at all about support and maintenance across thousands of sites and the advantage of having a limited set of technologies would bring in enabling more cross government sharing.

    Nope you just want to see your favourite technology being used.

    Personally I'd like to see the CTO take a machete to the costs of IT in federal government, OSS would be part of that but consistency would be the major element.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
  26. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Sebilrazen · · Score: 3, Funny

    He'd likely have a staff... and robes... and commandments.... wait, got derailed there.

    --
    "There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
  27. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Hmm, Barack Obama seems to be opposed to the Greenpeace position:

    Obama: Nuclear power worth considering, not panacea

    Could it be that Obama is actually a center-Right presidential candidate, and not the radical left wing terrorist sympathizing deep green wacko he was portrayed as in the campaign? Say it ain't so, Joe (the Plumber).

  28. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by torstenvl · · Score: 4, Funny

    Under Federal law, you have to be a licensed theoretical physicist if you want to begin a multi-billion-year chain fusion reaction.

  29. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by DrgnDancer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But think about it, a really representative panel of that sort would really need someone representing, say, Microsoft, maybe Apple, maybe HP and/or Dell, and then a couple of FOSS guys. Imagine Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, RMS, and ESR on such a committee. Easily imagined. Now imagine anything getting done by this committee, ever... Not so easily imagined. When the closed source guys were not fighting over which of their personal pet technologies was best for a given purpose, they'd be in grid-lock as RMS and the FOSS guys try to block all proprietary anything. I'd be inclined to say that the closed source people should get 4 seats and the FOSS 3 seats: on the theory that it's more likely that at least on closed source advocate would side with FOSS on a given specific question than that the the FOSS guys will ever side with the closed source guys, and if all 4 cosed source guys agree with something it's likely to be a least a slightly open system.

    Still I think one guy, preferably fairly neutral and willing to work with all parties and being advised by a committee like you recommend, would be better. He might not always do what any one of us might want or hope he'd do, but a least something will get done.
     

    --
    I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
  30. A holistic technocracy by An+dochasac · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's amazing how narrowly focused even the "community" of slashdotters are. Open/Closed source software, indeed software or even computer technology is just a tiny fragment of the areas of science where, as a nation, we've lost the plot. Bill Joy is a computer visionary, but he also sees outside of the box. See some of his insights here In my opinion, the individual or committee needs to be broadminded enough to see the interrelationships of technologies and education. Here is my wish list:
    • Restore the technical advisory counsel that Reagan sacked in favor of lobbyists.
    • Balance the Reaganomic "fiscal" value of education with the real societal value of education so basic research on energy, health, economics... and other areas of science unlikely to help G.E.s stock price in the next 91 days, don't forever sit on the back burner while Europe, India, China and Japan leave us in the technological dark ages.
    • Fix the SEC rules so they don't punish companies which throw money into research where they payoff is more than 91 days in the future. It's telling that the current market cap value of the R&D heavy company that Bill Joy cofounded (Sun) is far less than the global value of the technology contributed by that company.
    • Treat universities as a long term societal investment, not a short term fiscal investments. Our great universities are decaying into trade-schools or country clubs... whilst falling behind our foreign counterparts.
    • Use a six-sigma approach to all aspects of government (including voting). If the quality level of our hospitals was as low as that of our election counting, 800 babies would go home to the wrong parents every day.
    • Tag all funded research with the funding organization so we can vet the tobacco, coal and other industry studies telling us that toxic waste is good for us.
    • Focus government funding on areas of science with a longer term societal and fiscal payoff. We shouldn't be spending $1 of our tax money funding something that is only going to make Pfizer stockholders happy next year. Pfizer should be funding that!
    • We have several equivalents to sputnik right now, global climate change, high oil prices,
    • Create a technological WPA/CCC to rebuild our infrastructures in a green, sustainable, efficient and cost effective way. The 800 billion going to banks would be much better used to rebuild our infrastructure.
    • Create an office of public science which explains scientific research and decisions to the public so we can all make more informed decisions about science.
  31. Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar by SombreReptile · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think a board is the right move. And Ballmer should hold the chair.