TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Academics: Why it's faster, more lucrative, and fun to do startups

27 点作者 urlwolf超过 16 年前

5 条评论

jderick超过 16 年前
Startups don't do research. Some may try to commercialize research. Some research labs may also try to commercialize research. But true research is not something anyone would risk VC on. True research takes decades to see any ROI and usually even then it is unclear exactly what the ROI is, making traditional funding metrics useless. Here is an interesting book about Dupont, IBM, and other research labs trying to quantify the output of their research labs:<p><a href="http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6200&#38;page=6" rel="nofollow">http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6200&#38;page=6</a><p>Bottom line: you have to invest in research because you know it will pay off. But it is impossible to say exactly how or when it will pay off. The only kind of institution that can support that kind of investment is government or large (probably monopolistic) corporations.
评论 #426103 未加载
评论 #426660 未加载
scott_s超过 16 年前
His timeline doesn't apply to Computer Science - and possibly other fields like engineering, but I have much less experience with them. Because CS Ph.D.s can get industry jobs, there's less need for them to do postdocs. Some do, but it's still common for freshly minted Ph.D.s to get academic jobs. Of course, getting those positions is still just as difficult as it is for the real sciences, but there's not necessarily the 2-6 year delay.<p>I've given this topic some thought recently. Academia has it's problems, but what I do like is that I can work on things that are interesting and useful, but not necessarily profitable.<p>How can something be useful without being profitable? I do research in systems and high performance. In theory, the software we create could be sold. Some startups exist that do just that - Cilk Arts and RapidMind are two examples. But I'm skeptical of their viability; companies that exists solely to sell compilers rarely do well.<p>The kind of research I do is valuable to companies, but rarely as something to sell on its own. Intel, for example, does research in programming models for emerging architectures not because they want to sell that software, but because they need it so programmers can use the processors they do sell.
etal超过 16 年前
I'm suspicious that the measure of "innovation" is the number of patents filed, but I can't confirm that from the article. In academia, good ideas rarely materialize into patents; they become papers, and the relevance/influence/prestige is quantified in the number of other papers that cite them.<p>Fortunately, many schools do support startups (financially, even) coming out of their grad schools. I haven't noticed any discussion on the success of this kind of support versus traditional VC, but it makes lots of sense for a grad student to turn a thesis project into a startup immediately after graduation.
评论 #426562 未加载
Tichy超过 16 年前
Asking CEOs about sources of innovation seems rather biased. I think it is rather difficult to tackle difficult problems of certain kinds in a startup. Usually, you want to have an idea before you start that you can succeed.<p>Take the face recognition thing that Apple just announced. OK, that one came from a corporation, but one with lots of money. I think for a startup it would have been difficult to say "let's create a startup about face recognition in photos" because until recently, no sufficiently good method for doing it was known.
anthony_barker超过 16 年前
They should add competitors - lots of companies are simply first followers.