Re: OVC-discuss Digest, Vol 25, Issue 46

From: Danny Swarzman <danny_at_stowlake_dot_com>
Date: Tue Nov 28 2006 - 14:33:34 CST

I am a snob about this. There is no way that someone with a PhD in
formal language theory should be put in charge of specifying data
security procedures unless the same person had some other experience.

This makes as much sense as getting medical treatment from a person
with a PhD in physiology.

To get an MD you learn at the side of physicians who are operating on
real people. You take courses to learn a lot of theoretical stuff but
you can't skip the practical stuff. That's why universities often
have hospitals.

In the old days, computer science departments, engineering
departments and computer centers in universities where the main place
where software was produced. There were also Bell Labs and Xerox PARC.

Today's equivalent of the 1970's university is not today's
university. It's Google or Apple. Those are the places that attract
most of the brightest minds.

I don't mean to belittle the importance of the work done at
universities. A potential physician has a real incentive to get an
MD. A highly motivate person who wants to make a major contribution
to developing ways to keep data secure has little motivation to get a
PhD.

-Danny

On Nov 28, 2006, at 11:25 AM, Jerry Lobdill wrote:

> At 12:15 PM 11/28/2006, charlie strauss wrote:
>
>> I'm feeling like a snob even trying to reply to this but this comment
>> is so preposterous it makes me wince.
>
> Since you put it that way, I have no choice but to reply. :-)
>
>> Since were on the subject of
>> statistics it seems to me that statistically it's more likely that
>> some one with degree in mathematics would know about statistics then
>> someone without so it's not such a bad criteria. I've known a few
>> folks who did not really deserve their pHd, but the measure of that
>> is not what they know about "Gamma Funtions". The difference
>> between a Masters degree and a PhD is that a Master is someone who
>> has shown that they have been educated to mastery of a subject. A
>> pHD goes not to improved subject matter mastery but one has proven
>> one is capable of teaching yourself whatever you need to solve a
>> problem. The reason pHD holders are sought after is that they may
>> not know how to use a Gamma Function but that they demonstrated
>> competence in training themsleves so you know they can probably
>> figure it out if they need to.
>
> Yeah, well, as someone who has worked with and supervised researchers
> at all three levels of college education I can tell you that that's a
> nice theory, but it is so rarely realistic that it's hardly worth
> discussing. PhDs do, however, frequently have an excess of arrogance
> and hubris which sometimes tends to make them bloviate and come up
> with wrong answers. I mentioned the Gamma function and its
> elementary properties only as an example of the sort of things that
> people who manipulate mathematical equations, derive formulas, and
> solve problems need to be familiar and comfortable with (not just
> capable of figuring out if they have to). Someone who doesn't have
> that facility with the tools of the trade is no better on a panel
> like we're discussing than an activist with a lot of enthusiasm for
> democracy, it seems to me. And to focus on the credential is a
> mistake.
>
>> As I always tell the graduate
>> student's I've mentored: anyone can start working on a novel problem,
>> when you figure out how to finish working on it you get your pHD. If
>> it's easy to recognize when a problem has been solved then, with
>> obvious exceptions, it may not have been that hard a problem. A
>> pHD's education is about carving a neat, answerable problem, out of a
>> larger messy problem, not knowing more tools.
>>
>> That said, I don't think putting educational credentials in a legal
>> document is going to fly simply because it does smack of intellectual
>> snobbery and elitism and democracy don't mix.
>
> Well, then, I think we agree more than your first sentence would
> indicate.
>
>> It would however make
>> an excellent best practices document and hopefully will find it's way
>> into policy.
>>
>>
>> Now I'm going to go shower since my elitist guilt complex is making
>> me feel all clammy :-)
>
> As well it should! :-)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing list
> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>
>

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Thu Nov 30 23:17:15 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 23:17:19 CST