On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Francesco Biscani <bluesca...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't have any direct experience with EU funding, but I did work at a > European-level institution (ESA) for a few years and I must say that what > Bill says rings true to my ears. You have to understand that anything > "European" is really undertaken by a patchwork of different nations pulling > towards different directions and often competing with each other. ESA for > instance has a policy of "geographic return" that regulates many aspects of > the activity of the agency, from hiring to funding: > > http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Industry/Industry_how_to_do_business/Industrial_policy_and_geographical_distribution > > Any type of interaction with non-European entities is very complicated, to > the point, e.g., of requiring special permission from upper management to > hire unpaid interns from outside Europe. Going to conferences outside Europe > is very difficult. When we started SOCIS some years ago, > > http://sophia.estec.esa.int/socis/ > > I remember going through numerous meetings in which we had to came up with a > way to make the project "European", whereas our first impulse was to just > let it open to any student in the world. In the end we found a compromise in > the requirement that any participating student needs to be enrolled in a > European University. > > I have no difficulties believing the EU operates under similar constraints.
Fair point. The NSF and other US agency funding often come with similar restrictions... > On 29 August 2014 19:03, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> To be fair, in context, you were talking about nationalism and objecting >> to me apparently characterising Sage as a US project. The *mathematical* >> diversity of the contributors is completely tangential to that argument. >> >> I think I made my argument transparent enough. You aren't going to help >> European mathematical software projects, such as the ones listed, by >> applying for money to work directly on Sage. Referees will see through it >> immediately if you try to make that claim. >> >> To my knowledge, the European Union funding agencies did not have a >> significant stake in the origin and development of Sage, but the NSF and >> other US institutions did. From the point of view of the European Union, as >> far as I can tell, Sage is a US originating project. As such, you aren't >> going to have a chance of convincing them that development of Sage is >> funding a European software project! >> >> On the other hand, a European software project, which is focused on >> cooperation (at the technical and professional level) of existing European >> mathematical software projects, *whether or not* making use of Sage, can be >> sold to referees and stakeholders. Then, as was pointed out by someone else, >> you make the case that Sage is an *international collaboration*, not a US >> project. At that level, Sage is not a US project. >> >> But any European project must really and substantially benefit European >> software projects and the primary impact should be to the European economy! >> >> My very first sentence was "Nicolas, I wish you the best with a European >> grant based on Sage." Indeed, I hope a large scale European software project >> based on Sage is successful. But it needs to directly address the issue of >> how it helps mathematical software developed here in Europe. I hope it is >> also clear from those words that I was fully anticipating that Nicolas did >> have have in mind something of great benefit to those of us in Europe >> working on libraries and software projects used by Sage! >> >> It's difficult to come up with an example that makes the European >> situation clear, since for example Magma has received substantial funding >> from the US, precisely because it benefits US stakeholders. That in spite of >> the fact that most of its IP belongs to USyd. However, the argument would be >> similar if I applied for money from the EU to develop Magma on account of it >> having a numerous developers in Europe and that it uses European developed >> software libraries. Obviously the primary beneficiaries in such an >> arrangement would be Australian taxpayers and certainly not those European >> software projects! Referees just aren't going to go for that. >> >> That doesn't mean that Magma can't be part of the overall strategy of such >> a grant, as I'm sure is the case for a number of projects funded from within >> the EU currently. But it can't be the focus of such a grant. >> >> Anyway, we've drifted way off topic. I merely wanted to encourage Nicolas, >> to mention some of the things that I personally think might be factors in >> such a proposal being successful in Europe, and to vaguely bring his >> attention to other similar efforts, without getting deeply involved myself >> (I'm just a lowly postdoc and have no say in these matters). >> >> I'm sorry I wasn't clearer in the first instance. I hope I'm being clear >> now. >> >> Bill. >> >> On Friday, 29 August 2014 17:10:53 UTC+2, Volker Braun wrote: >>> >>> On Friday, August 29, 2014 1:03:06 PM UTC+1, Bill Hart wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What sets Sage apart from GAP/Singular (and, I dare say: Flint) is the >>>>> scale and the diversity of its contributors. >>>> >>>> >>>> No, what sets it apart is the number of contributors. Flint has had >>>> contributors from all over the world. I would say from every continent >>>> except Africa and Antarctica. >>> >>> >>> No, it is NOT just the number of contributors. Sage is nothing like Fint >>> with 20x the number of programmers. In fact, all of your posts generally >>> come from that assumption, but it couldn't be further from the truth. >>> >>> When I said "diversity", I meant diversity in mathematical interests of >>> course. Not geographical diversity or color of the skin. >>> >>> There is no single person that understands all of the algorithms in Sage, >>> or would be qualified to implement them across disciplines. Instead, there >>> are many people taking on leadership roles in their respective field of >>> research. Sage is very much a collaborative effort where no single person / >>> university decides on where to go. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "sage-devel" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
