_New Yorker_ Article Comparing Tech IP To Art IP
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Posted by Bret Cahill on July 21, 2008, 1:29 pm
Please log in for more thread options personality isn't nearly the factor as in the arts? Bret Cahill | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by John Larkin on July 21, 2008, 10:41 pm
Please log in for more thread options Link? Personality is crucial to electronic design. The difference between engineering and art is that engineering has to work, and is tested. John | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Bret Cahill on July 22, 2008, 12:04 am
Please log in for more thread options > >Anyone see the recent _New Yorker_ article comparing tech IP where
> >personality isn't nearly the factor as in the arts? >
> >Bret Cahill
>
> Link? > > Personality is crucial to electronic design. The difference between > engineering and art is that engineering has to work, and is tested. The role of personality may in fact be just as important in tech as the arts; it's just not nearly as obvious in tech. In tech the personality part is far enough removed or isolated from the final solution it's untraceable. Even most of those in the field don't really care or notice how it came about. For example, the inventor of the Si nanowire battery was astounded that his breakthrough was such a seemingly straightforward solution to a decades old problem. To keep the Si from cracking as it swelled while charging, he merely made the Si thinner, the same tactic that has been used for centuries to make wire rope more supple. It's easy to believe his personality played no role whatsoever. But still, there was something about his personality that led him to that "obvious" solution. After "Graceland" Paul Simon was attacked for doing something that "anyone could do." Rhymin' Simon answered, "but anyone didn't do it. _I_ did it." That might be the real similarity between tech IP and art IP. Bret Cahill | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by John Larkin on July 22, 2008, 1:57 am
Please log in for more thread options On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:04:45 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
>> >Anyone see the recent _New Yorker_ article comparing tech IP where
>> >personality isn't nearly the factor as in the arts? >>
>> >Bret Cahill
>>
>> Link? >> >> Personality is crucial to electronic design. The difference between >> engineering and art is that engineering has to work, and is tested. >
>The role of personality may in fact be just as important in tech as >the arts; it's just not nearly as obvious in tech. It is to the people who understand it, and do it. The details of electronic design just aren't as visible, or "accessible", to the public as a Batman movie. >In tech the
>personality part is far enough removed or isolated from the final >solution it's untraceable. Even most of those in the field don't >really care or notice how it came about. Are you talking about art, or about fashion? When the artist becomes more important than the art, you're dealing with cult of personality, or perhaps investment opportunities. A greek statue, by an unknown artist, stands on its own, as does a superb frequency synthesizer. A Kincaid painting doesn't. >
>For example, the inventor of the Si nanowire battery was astounded >that his breakthrough was such a seemingly straightforward solution to >a decades old problem. To keep the Si from cracking as it swelled >while charging, he merely made the Si thinner, the same tactic that >has been used for centuries to make wire rope more supple. It's easy >to believe his personality played no role whatsoever. But still, >there was something about his personality that led him to that >"obvious" solution. Where can I buy some of those batteries? John | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by on July 22, 2008, 2:18 am
Please log in for more thread options > >> >Anyone see the recent _New Yorker_ article comparing tech IP where
> >> >personality isn't nearly the factor as in the arts? >
> >> >Bret Cahill
>
> >> Link?
>
> >> Personality is crucial to electronic design. The difference between
> >> engineering and art is that engineering has to work, and is tested. >
> >The role of personality may in fact be just as important in tech as
> >the arts; it's just not nearly as obvious in tech. >
> It is to the people who understand it, and do it. The details of > electronic design just aren't as visible, or "accessible", to the > public as a Batman movie. > > >In tech the
t
> >personality part is far enough removed or isolated from the final > >solution it's untraceable. =EF=BF=BDEven most of those in the field don'= > >really care or notice how it came about.
>
> Are you talking about art, or about fashion? You think tech is art or fashion? Anyway you dodged the issue: After "Graceland" Paul Simon was attacked for doing something that "anyone could do." Rhymin' Simon answered, "but anyone didn't do it. _I_ did it." That might be the real similarity between tech IP and art IP. Bret Cahill | |||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| _New Yorker_ Article Comparing Tech IP To Art IP | July 21, 2008, 1:29 pm |
| interesting article on op-amps | December 11, 2005, 8:08 am |
| An Article: About Electromagnetic Radiation Measurement | May 11, 2006, 1:46 pm |
| An Article: An Introduction to Power Factor | May 16, 2006, 2:27 am |
| comparing CS and Cascode frequency response | May 2, 2007, 6:43 pm |
| Article Streaming Audio Made Easy | June 16, 2007, 8:48 am |
| Comparing the frequencies of two slow reference clocks | August 14, 2006, 2:13 pm |
| updated tech news | March 27, 2006, 8:04 pm |
| OT: Semiconductor tech support | July 6, 2007, 6:23 pm |
| Faking A Tech Background | July 31, 2008, 11:53 am |
| Newbie (ignorant) tech question | January 5, 2007, 1:06 pm |
| SolderSmoke#17 NE602, LTSpice, K1, Receivers, Enigma, Saturn, Tech Topics | March 6, 2006, 4:01 pm |
| Visit the Groups Website for Software, tech support, formulas, links, | August 7, 2006, 3:06 am |
>personality isn't nearly the factor as in the arts?
>
>
>Bret Cahill
>