somebody wrote:
> "Patrick Elliott" <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote in message
> news:48dd2921$1@news.povray.org...
>> Modern die technology
> 
> You mean dye, right? However, let me jump on the "die technology". We have
> been developing casting methodologies for millenia. It's all an incremental
> business. And it's hard work. It's trial and error, theory... etc. Countless
> technicians and scientists have worked on the process with the *express
> intent* of improving the process. Next time you see an object of industrial
> design, don't dismiss its realization as "accidental". It's a result of
> focused development. Same for any technology, be it electronics, computers,
> medical... etc. Don't buy into the Hollywood version of science and
> technology. 

Yeah. Dye. And I wasn't talking about more recent developments, many of 
them derived from figuring "why" that original accident worked. As for 
Hollywood versions.. I am not talking about fracking Hollywood versions 
of science, I am talking about what a fair number of scientists in the 
fields have said on the subject. The company that makes Teflon 
"specifically" told their people to look for such accidental 
discoveries, precisely because they do happen, and they usually get 
missed. And, more to the point, the "reason" for this is often because 
the people doing "directed" research are "specialists" who don't have 
sufficient cross discipline knowledge to recognize when they have 
stumbled over something new. There are even businesses arising within 
the last 5-10 years "specifically" directed at hiring large numbers of 
specialists to work in teams, for the express purpose of advising the 
people you are talking about, to check over the stuff they are doing, to 
see if they are blindly missing developments in other fields that could 
improve their own projects. This is a *new* development.

Experts are often blinded by their own narrow expertise. And as much as 
you hate examples. One group of Computer Science people went in to look 
over the systems used by Astrological researchers and found that their 
"expertise" was so narrow they had no clue that modern debuggers 
existed, where still coding their projects by hand using text editors, 
and that 9 out 10 ten of all experimental projects would **failing**, 
for no other reason than that they couldn't debug the complex code well 
enough to make those experiments "work properly".

You have a much higher estimation of what directed/applied research can 
and does do than I do, and a much lower one than most scientists have 
for "lucky accidents".

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message