Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site frog.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!john
From: john@frog.UUCP (John Woods, Software)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: spinoffs
Message-ID: <282@frog.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Nov-85 11:08:59 EST
Article-I.D.: frog.282
Posted: Wed Nov 27 11:08:59 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 30-Nov-85 00:53:52 EST
References: <8511191259.AA24626@decwrl.DEC.COM> <275@kovacs.UUCP> <1264@ames.UUCP>
Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA
Lines: 37

> NASA [note the caps] does not attempt to justify it's existence via
> "spinoffs" although some of you may note that there is a publication
> of this title.  NASA's business is SPACE and AERONAUTICS, to almost
> a blind ignorance of other technologies [materials science, computers,
> etc.]  Only when it is in their interest does NASA concern itself.
> 
> I wrote a brief thing describing the importance of thinking about living
> in an age where Relativity and space travel are reality, [about two years
> ago?]  and I received a couple of comments about "more eliquoent (sp)
> than Carl..."  [Thanks, I'm not that good].  I said that spinoffs are not
> the justification for any large research program.  NASA does not [nor
> does SDI for that matter] heavily justify spinoff.
> 
It's always dangerous to argue about horses after the horse has spoken, but...

I just received my first issue of "NASA Tech Briefs", a publication put out
by NASA to tell the world what patents they have ripe for plucking.  This is
in addition to the publication Spinoffs, which (according to the blurb in
the Tech Briefs) exists to tell about those patents which have been
successfully plucked.

(At least some portion of) NASA is quite aware of the benefits of spinoffs,
and, at least as a practical matter, understand that when talking to Congress
or businessmen, the best way to "justify" this "``huge'' expense" is to point
out how much money their constituents/they stand to make because of it.

However, I am tremendously glad that NASA tells their engineers to screw the
spinoffs and get on with "SPACE and AERONAUTICS", like they are supposed to.
When NASA speaks to me, their justification comes from missions, not Velcro.
And I'm a satisfied customer!

--
John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, (617) 626-1101
...!decvax!frog!john, ...!mit-eddie!jfw, jfw%mit-ccc@MIT-XX.ARPA

Out of my way, I'm a scientist!
	War of the Worlds