[...] I believe that this approach is not sustainable over time. As the number of categories I’m using increases, it becomes more difficult to scan the possible array of possibilities when I’m making a post. I also find myself reluctant to create new categories and often attempt to “squish” the post into an existing category. The result of this activity is a huge array of topical HTML and RSS repositories that (so far) nobody looks at. [...]
I agree: categories don't scale well, yet fine-grained indexing would be useful. There's a tension there that needs to be resolved. Many good additional points in that post.
Who Owns Ideas? The War Over Global Intellectual Property. Good discussion of the arguments over copyright that I link to even though I disagree with it (I'm so noble). This is in general a very well written discussion. But the opinion expressed in the article turns on the same old tired argument: "Preventing the distribution of copycat drugs because of adherence to patent laws invariably means that some desperately ill patients will not have access to medicines they need. Yet the act of ignoring patents in the name of helping sick people curbs the incentive to develop new, lifesaving drugs in the future." That's so not true. Some people would work for the good of humanity. Others would work for government research labs, set up for the good of humanity (at least a part of my work is of the former variety, part of the latter variety). The assumption is that people won't conduct research unless they can hold the rest of society at ransom for it. It's just not true, we know it's not true, and yet this argument continues to circulate. By David S. Evans, Foreign Affairs, November/December 2002 [OLDaily]
An interesting collection of interviews about how one group of leading edge thinkers are staying informed. It has very little to do with conventional sources of information and lots to do with the web and with weblogs. [PopTech, The Blog via McGee's Musings]
Sadly, academia in America is rife with petty politics, infighting and backstabbing among our intellectual leaders. Instead of eternal truths, politically correct and trendy fads are force-fed to our students. Instead of being led by the "best and brightest," those who ascend to the top of the ivory tower are generally those of the weakest mind and pettiest of agendas.
Instead of inspiring generations of young people to think outside the box; and to think for themselves - academia emphasizes mimicry, training the young to dance like the organ grinder's monkey, to echo the stale and hollow theory of the master. Innovation is routinely punished. Original thought is considered heresy. Tenure most often goes to those who work to suppress the creative instincts of future generations - protecting those who conspire to dilute America's ingenuity.
True, there are heroic individuals within academia who stand up for truths that are eternal and who inspire the younger generation to liberate their thoughts as they ascend to higher levels of understanding. But they are the exception and more often than not are punished for their popularity, blacklisted for their bravery, and exiled for their independent spirits. [...]
We believe that academia can be liberated - but only if its corruption is exposed. We ask you to share with us your experiences of academia's corruption by e-mailing your tales of terror from the academy.
This account is caricatural, and the name and logo may be a wee bit distasteful, but the underlying intent is noble. The site tracks news stories in line with the theme. However, the navigation links are bogus, which make me think this might be a hoax. Brian Martin's accounts of power in academia are easier to take seriously.
