the people having done their career, retired or just without career hope, are sometime the only free enough to dissent.
the situation, the structure of incentives, is often the most important to create the condition of innovation, success, progress... there is no genetically stupid groups, but some group , some societies, some corporation, some countries, who because of regulation, incentives, culture, education are unable to let the good in their member be expressed. 2014-09-03 20:30 GMT+02:00 Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com>: > Daniel, > I agree with you that the age part is not so essential. It is a little bit > true because there is a common believe that Einstein had it right. I think > the attitude is of more importance than the age. I am amazed that the > report does omit the big change in how the funding society works and have > evolved. > Government is the primary source today and universities are the route for > funding. > The private route is through large banks (which have outlived themselves > btw). Both are large organizations, which forms decisions on statistics and > general policies. Creditscore! > Anyone who has tried to get to a Controversial Result in a committee knows > that it is impossible. One need to persuade individuals to side with ones > opinion and then press this opinion on the group. The reason is that very > few people will take the risk of being wrong. In large organizations nobody > get rewarded for taking a risk and nobody get punished for doing as the > majority. I believe that we will see a reaction to this big scale policy > driven society. I further think that now is the time for change. The > internet and a fantastic resource for fast and direct communication between > people willing to take action would outdo all the established channels like > banks and government. This is of course not directly related to LENR. > A hundred years ago we found out that having control of the whole chain > was essential. Reason are obvious, uneducated labor needed a lot of > support, nobody could provide standard products to be utilized in the > emerging industries i.e. automotive. We have since learnt to outsource, > society has offered education for a large portion of the population, trade > unions have shaped the workplace, the 'Edwards Deming' revolution, just > in time programs etc. basically are opening the market for a business model > more based on individuals than size. > I think it is time to take the funding power away from the politician and > the totally failed financial market. I know it is a long way and that I > probably will not experience the switch but I think its time is here. > > Best Regards , > Lennart Thornros > > www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com > lenn...@thornros.com > +1 916 436 1899 > 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 > > “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a > commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I think it is a very pertinent discussion regarding issues of CF inside >> the larger science community: >> >> >> http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/09/is-there-a-creativity-deficit-in-science/ >> >> Although I don't agree with the age argument. >> >> >> -- >> Daniel Rocha - RJ >> danieldi...@gmail.com >> > >
