Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Innovation In Tom's Idiocy

Tom Friedman, whose hard-on for green technology knows no bounds, writes that Congress is too penny-wise and pound-foolish to fund eight innovation hubs to solve the world's energy problems. They'll only cost $25 million each.

“You mean billion,” he asks? “No,” I say. “We’re talking about $25 million.” “Billion,” he repeats. “No. Million,” I insist.

And then he quotes Energy Secretary Steven Chu:
“We don’t want incremental improvements,” said Chu. “We want real leaps — game-changing” breakthroughs — like a 75 percent reduction in energy used in a commercial building through affordable design and software improvements. “America has shown we can do this,” concluded Chu. “The scientists and engineers see the problem; they see the opportunity; they see what is at stake, and they want to help.” That is why we should fully fund all eight now.

So, if it's a matter of a mere $25 million or so and the scientists and engineers can see the end of the tunnel on some massive breakthroughs do we need government to fund it? Wouldn't a private company see this low cost-high reward with apparently zero risk investment extremely appealing?

Shit. If it's a mere matter of $25 million to change the entire world and make trillions of dollars with little to no risk, then I'm sure I can scrounge it up.

Seriously, Tom, you sound like a fucking idiot to anybody who has, I dunno, fucking thoughts.

3 comments:

The Ancient said...

I thought Nathan Myhrvold had already bought up all future patents on all future good ideas.

(If it's such a slam dunk thing, why doesn't Tom just ask his father-in-law for the money and do it himself? Or sell his house? Or check for loose change under the sofa cushions?)

George Pal said...

Jackbootery In Tomfoolery

If it weren’t for his ‘idiocy’ there’d be no purpose to Thomas.

“We need to stop waiting for Superman and start building a superconsensus to do the superhard stuff we must do now. Pretty good is not even close to good enough today”. – Thomas Friedman (re Third Party)

Friedman was sure personality would galvanize the masses into superconsenus. The personality he had in mind, unfortunately, was less cult and more disorder. Now soured on the Great Man theory, his blood’s in a boil for a third party, the Party for superconsensus, aka social solidarity, alias volksgemeinschaft.

If it weren’t for Friedman’s ‘idiocy’ how would we know “God has set limits on man’s intelligence, none on his stupidity.” (Alice von Hildebrand) isn’t just a theory.

David said...

Friedman and Chu and similar idiots fail to understand that "R&D" is not a synonym of "innovation." If it were, then Xerox PARC would have been a major commercial success as well as a technical success, and Xerox Corporation would be dominating the computer industry.

See my post leaving a trillion on the table (although I probably understated the impact by an order of magnitude)

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.