Skip to main content

BrowserID in the Edison Quadrant?

I have been reading up on Donald Stokes theories of innovation, which, for some reason I had not seen before.   It is quite philosophical, but has some interesting points.  The main one is that "the path to innovative products" does not always start from pure research and evolve towards useful products.  Instead, research often moves between quadrants - both left and right as well as up and down.  Sometimes, for example, very applied research will highlight a fundamental technology gap, which then drives use-inspired basic research.  Beyond Bohr, Pasteur, and Edison, I was trying to map some other projects into the matrix.  DARPA, for example, is focused in the Pasteur Quadrant, while the CERN work is certainly Bohr-ish :-)

BrowserID, which we have been developing at Mozilla, is a good example of Edison research.  The fundamental building blocks were available, but they had not been put together in a way that met our "consideration of use" (a sign-in system which respects the privacy goal of "law of least knowledge").

Popular posts from this blog

Timed math tests

You have 3.2 seconds to figure out the problem below. Alan knows 90% of the concepts behind the math test, and can do those 90% very quickly.  He always gets 90% on timed math tests. Bob knows 100% of the concepts, but is a slow worker.  In the timed math test, he gets 75%, but, if given an extra 10 minutes, would get 100%. Alan graduates with an A; Bob with a C. You are building a bridge. Who would you hire? Seems like everyone from Gates to Zuckerberg has problems with how education is carried out today.  I wish I had some of their clout and could help to change the system.

FTC should look at the Republicrats

It strikes me that the Republicrats (the Democrats and the Republicans) form an unfair monopoly.  While antitrust law is typically associated with corporations, it could, conceivably also be applied to government (the FTC is an independent government body). Triggering the antitrust laws typically means that you have a monopoly (hard to argue against that for the Republicrats) and that you abuse that position.  It has become abundantly clear over the last year that both parties are abusing their positions by focusing all of their energies on "win at any cost" as opposed to "do something for the country."  This is also why they can be considered a single entity (for the purposes of a monopoly)...they are not really two parties; just one inward facing machine. Unfortunately, it appears that there will not be any real third party, yet again, in the next election....so there is no motivation for either party to change their behavior.   It also appears that you ...