[MURG] Re: MURG digest, Vol 1 #151 - 2 msgs

[Randal A. Koene]

Hi there,

On Wed, 14 May 2003, king-yin yan wrote:

> Hi Ed and Randal =)
>
> I see your points. You like making baby steps; I want to narrow
> down the search space as fast as possible. I think the outcome
> of the experiment is relatively predictable, you disagree. It's
> looking like you won't change and I won't change. No problem,
> count 70% of me in.

Call it baby steps if you like, I just call it sensible.
When you actually manage to upload a worm, you have a verifiable procedure
and its a matter of scale from there on.
If you start with something complex that you have no way of checking
properly then you're asking for trouble and you may as well be peddling
magic - but hey, that's just my opinion.

> YET another problem with the worm project is that it does not
> pay financially. It's the kind of basic research that's best
> conducted by academia (public funding). Are you really content
> with no pay? =)

To me that doesn't look like much of a retort. I think this IS a project
best initiated within academia anyway, which is why I'm in academia in the
first place. If there are commercial spin-offs that's fine. The most
important aspect of getting anything at all done on this is truly good old
honest basic research. The vast majority of all experts that can
contribute in this way are already working and collaborating through the
tried and tested scientific channels in academia. Again, I'm not opposed
to commercial aspects at all, but I do think academic research is
extremely relevant to us, and the worm project fits the bill. Similar
projects may do as well, of course.

Cheers,
       Randal