in computer science, we receive a tiny fraction of what the medical researchers receive, but we seem to have a much greater impact on society
Computing has had a big effect, but assigning this to computer science departments is unjustified. Most practitioner’s eyes glaze over when they see a PDF and use technology and practices developed in industry.
Computing has had a big effect, but assigning this to computer science
departments is unjustified. Most practitioner’s eyes glaze over when
they see a PDF and use technology and practices developed in industry.
I am sympathetic to the point of view that only a small fraction of the progress in computing can be attributed to computer-science researchers, but we are starting from a small investment. The government-sponsored medical research is much richer, and so it should be judged accordingly.
We are spending more each year on research for single diseases than for all of computer science, with often no clinical translation in sight.
There is an accountability issue in medical research that is just not present in computer science.
Dominic Amannsays:
On the subject of health research – I don’t know many health researchers, and only a few more doctors, but they are almost universally motivated more by “helping people” than by what I consider scientific curiosity. Those that are more scientifically minded go into science or engineering disciplines.
I have had numerous discussions with doctors who don’t understand basic statistics for example, who were arguing for certain types of screening. Lo and behold – those types of screening are finally being discarded.
I don’t know many health researchers, and only a few more doctors, but
they are almost universally motivated more by “helping people†than by
what I consider scientific curiosity. Those that are more
scientifically minded go into science or engineering disciplines.
I think that we have clear indications that medical researchers do not do much to “help people” in aggregate.
Matt Fulkersonsays:
Damnit. Now you have challenged me to start doing pushups again. I recommend doing them first thing after you wake up, because you are too sleepy to feel them. 🙂
Computing has had a big effect, but assigning this to computer science departments is unjustified. Most practitioner’s eyes glaze over when they see a PDF and use technology and practices developed in industry.
I am sympathetic to the point of view that only a small fraction of the progress in computing can be attributed to computer-science researchers, but we are starting from a small investment. The government-sponsored medical research is much richer, and so it should be judged accordingly.
We are spending more each year on research for single diseases than for all of computer science, with often no clinical translation in sight.
There is an accountability issue in medical research that is just not present in computer science.
On the subject of health research – I don’t know many health researchers, and only a few more doctors, but they are almost universally motivated more by “helping people” than by what I consider scientific curiosity. Those that are more scientifically minded go into science or engineering disciplines.
I have had numerous discussions with doctors who don’t understand basic statistics for example, who were arguing for certain types of screening. Lo and behold – those types of screening are finally being discarded.
I think that we have clear indications that medical researchers do not do much to “help people” in aggregate.
Damnit. Now you have challenged me to start doing pushups again. I recommend doing them first thing after you wake up, because you are too sleepy to feel them. 🙂