TED Conversations

William Palaia

President & CEO, Universal Joint Productions Co.

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

How do we maintain transparency in discovery?

When ideas are loose and abstract we have little issue with sharing. It's when they begin to solidify into tangible "assets", that we pull back and hoard for ourselves. I have experienced this a few times in the past 15 years. Unfortunately, I've been on the losing-end of this more than once.

Does the need to be the first named person at the mountaintop, reaping the rewards associated, prevent us from ultimately openly sharing said discovery? Or do we wait until a patent is filed to open the books?

Topics: community discovery patent law
+1
Share:

Closing Statement from William Palaia

The lack of response has been helpful. I must have stated the obvious...

progress indicator
  • thumb

    William Palaia

    • 0
    Mar 31 2011: Thank you. The draw of achievement is a huge motivator. I also appreciate your mentioning the idea of time. From the initial point of discovery, a "clock" begins ticking, signaling the start of the race to the finish.
  • thumb

    Nicholas Lukowiak 50+

    • 0
    Mar 31 2011: I find this argument to be a sound one especially when considering the idea of time. There are two (in my opinion) fighting sides of time. One says time is a river, you cannot go back, it is set, and the future cannot change the past. The second is space-time, is the idea that time is more like space than what we assume time really is; an example would be clapping hands. Normally people perceive clapping hands as all past events that creates the resulted applause in the now or here, in space-time the past actions (open hand) and the future actions (the contact) are the manipulation of time creating the now. Essentially space-time makes time almost exactly like space, and space has a lot less limitations than time.

    Now, what's the point? Well when you tell a physicist or an engineer that something is CERTAIN then it limits their ability to work. (This is where I agree with this idea) Rather than saying space-time is right or the flow of time is correct, work in the worlds of both being plausible. Because in the flow of time respect, time-travel is impossible, however in space-time it is just highly complex and very advanced. But imagine what could be learned from the gap of now to the first step towards time-travel, how much could be developed?

    Indeed elitism is an enemy of science. Transparency has no profit, no gain, and no reward other than knowing you are progressing universal thought, but that is a taught value. Which is a whole other topic. Good post though.
Showing all 2 comments