Reid, and all, I am new to this list, and not sensitive to the issues generating discussion of how to control behavior and truth-telling here. The matter of the relations between universities and the larger society seems critical to the future of the Internet. So: Reid describes Michael Gibbons' Mode 1 and Mode 2 this way: <<In mode 1 the Universities and their social structures and customs (praxis)have a stranglehold on the creation and dissemination of knowledge. In mode 2 applications become a major driving force. In this scenario practitioners in search of solutions to real world problems take on a more important role.These practitioners are not likely to be Ph.D.s. Gibbons does not directly say this but it is inherent in the mode 2 schema.>> The statements in this paragraph are factually false, and distort Gibbons' message. First, and most important: the universities have never had, or claimed, or wanted "a stranglehold on the creation and dissemination of knowledge." Had they wanted such a "stranglehold" they have never had the power to prevent the government, the military, the industrial research laboratory, or the solitary explorer in his basement from researching. Indeed, a major criticism of university research is that it has often been compromised by its dependence on funds from these non-university sources, and that its research agenda has often been shaped by donor interests rather than society's needs and thus there has developed the drift to applied rather than basic research. Gibbons' Mode 2 is largely in effect now: "partnerships" and close collaboration between the university research lab and the research activities of the business, industry, the military, and government. The trend is in this direction, and it is unlikely that it will stop. In one view we now need another independent research effort to determine whether the long term interests of the nation and the world are being neglected in the pursuit of research devoted to products and processes with an immediate profit potential. This trend and current needs for researchers seem to offer no clear signal for our need for researchers at the Ph.D. level. Part of that answer seems related to the question of how research attention is divided between basic and applied research. Steve Eskow I have interviewed and evaluated industrial scientists for decades. Moderate deep learning, creativity and a real world vision is the sought after commodity. This is directly opposite of the institutional hiring and research policies of the Universities. Which brings us directly back to the article in TheScience magazine. Also in industry the sharing of knowledge is the rule, in academia the ownership of knowledge prevails. I know this is counter-intuitive considering that Universities are centers of learning. One only has to look at disciplinarity in Universities and the difficulty of establishing true cross-disciplinarity. You see the same thing happening in this listserv conflict. Ie. "We own the knowledge" about the internet." You're not an academic so you don't know anything. My views are particularly problematic because I'm a heretic in the "Temple of Phud" and alien with my real world orientation. Perish the future. I'm really enjoying this exchange. Reid -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Steve Eskow Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 12:08 AM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org; wrc@tcfir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] Air-list Reid, I'd be interested in the parallel to your views that you find in Michael Gibbons. His principal point, if I recall correctly, has to do with the difference between "Mode 1" and "Mode 2" approaches to the production and dissemination of knowledge. Is that your understanding? The "Mode 2" approach seems to have important implications for the relations between university research and the future of the Internet. Have you discussed that relationship? I don't recall is emphasizing the matter of the Ph.D. and university employment. Steve Eskow -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Dr. W. Reid Cornwell Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 9:27 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] Air-list I am addressing the term "list-relevant" Air-1 Archives contain: 1096 Articles that contain "education" as a topic 491 that have references to "jobs" 708 that have reference to "positions" 2084 that have reference to "PhD and education" Scholar.google.com reveals 103 peer reviewed articles on "Monster Board" Alone Scholar.google.com has 28,900 hits on "job search" Scholar.google.com has 224 hits on "internet job search" There are no references to Monster Board in the AOIR archive. "The New Production of knowledge" Gibbons et al makes significant points about PhD and Universities that parallels my view. I guess I have no clue as to what is listserv-relevant. There are only 600 references to "AOIR" total and some of them are about "Ambient Ingress Oxygen Rate" Reid -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of joshua raclaw Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 9:20 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] Air-list Christian, I wouldn't say we all have the 'have to' impulse, having deleted a number of these recent emails outright rather than wade through them all while hoping for something list-relevant :) I'm not sure I see the connection between that kind of impetus and F2F habits, though - attending to list posts involves actively opening emails using a medium that was designed for asynchronous communication, which I don't see much of a parallel to in face to face spoken discourse (though I could certainly see a parallel between the unopened mail in the inbox to the summons of a telephone ring, where the 'expected' action is to give the message your time). I think defining 'the floor' as being the same in email and F2F is where I'm seeing the disconnect. Joshua Joshua Raclaw - PhD student Department of Linguistics Culture, Language & Social Practice University of Colorado at Boulder http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~raclaw/ Quoting Christian Nelson <xianknelson@mac.com>: * * On Sep 13, 2006, at 7:33 PM, radhika gajjala wrote: * * > its so sad that people (and I include myself here) have to waste their * > time and energy arguing over all this when there is so much else to be * > done - both onine and offline. * * "Have to"? That's the feeling I'm interested in. Does everyone feel * that? They can't help but read everything posted to the list? Where * does that come from? Is it, as I earlier suggested, due to a holdover * of f2f habits, or something else? * --Christian * * _______________________________________________ * The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list * is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org * Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: * http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org * * Join the Association of Internet Researchers: * http://www.aoir.org/ * _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/