Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Silvia Pfeiffer]

Hi Marghanita,

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Marghanita da Cruz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Though you haven't clarified what the panel is
> you referred to or in what capacity you are involved.

Sorry, I should indeed have said more. The discussion panel that I
will be on is during an event where the Green Paper is being
discussed. The panel consists of 5 people which will first discuss the
pros and cons of the review outcome amongst themselves and afterwards
the discussion will be opened to the audience for questions. I'm just
a person on this discussion panel and wanted to widen my information
basis a bit through this enquiry.

I must also add that I thought the 2020 Summit was more closely
related to the Innovation Review and they shared submission, which I
now know is not true. Some of the input to the 2020 Summit will of
course be relevant to the Innovation Review, so I will check
submissions there
http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/home.cfm.

> From my own perspective, I would like to hear other views whether the
> enquiry is interested or capable of taking them on board or not - I think
> they are relevant to the governance of ICT.

Agreed.

Cheers,
Silvia.
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[david . lyon]

Quoting Erik de Castro Lopo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:


Just for your information: I do not work for the government nor is it
any of the stuff on www.innovation.gov.au my website.



David, please note the above.


I stand corrected... my apologies..

I'm not a very good people person.. at the best of times

and you know what it is like having too many things on the boil in too  
many places..


sorry :-)

David

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[david . lyon]

Quoting Marghanita da Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

I share David's skepticism and would even venture he is being   
extremely polite given the reality.


I don't know if I am skeptical.. and reality is usually the
result of what you did yesterday...


Perhaps a change of government could improve
things.


Didn't we just do that ?

The old ones were stooges


The biggest and most useful source of government funding is it's contracts.
There used to be a local content/industry development component but
that is gone and maybe it didn't work.


Actually that is misinformation.

We've had some excellent industries in Australia and often they've  
been shut down by governments unfairly. (This applies to Linux)


Then they want to do something to correct the mistake and pump in 17c  
but only 4c ends up getting to the people to do the work.


Who wants to work for that ?

At the same time (applies to linux), they pump money offshore to buy  
basically the same thing.


Perphaps there is some good management there.. keep some costs down.  
(doesn't apply to Linux)



However, given the size of the Australian market if
these contracts/customers are denied to local companies (to not just develop
technical but
leadership experience) then anything else the government does is just
whitewash.


more misinformation.

There are 2 billion people on our doorstep

are you blind ?

You really need to fix ASIO. It has a serious problem if it hasn't  
noticed that the population centre of the world is now about 10 hours  
flight away...


Can you sell ASIO off ? Talk about one "corrupted" organisation in the  
true sense of the word...


Most intelligence services now and for hundreds of years collect  
business intelligence information for their country.


ASIO does sure.

but for which countries is the question that I want to know...

damn... I am trying to work on Linux and that ASIO thing still  
applies... because our governments don't even know where people and  
markets are...


David




--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Marghanita da Cruz]

Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

Marghanita,

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Marghanita da Cruz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Sylvia,

If people bother to reply to you, they are  not claiming defeat, just
questioning whether it is worthwhile putting any effort into another
government enquiry - particularly one labelled "innovation".


Why bother replying to me then as I have obviously already decided to
put in some effort? If it's not worth putting effort behind the
activity why waste time telling others to not bother either?


Sylvia,

Sorry I meant bothering to make a submission to the enquiry, rather than 
responding on this or other lists.


By the way, using a mailing list seems a surprisingly (for 2008) innovative way 
in which the the inquiry could have sought input if they were particularly 
interested - which
you have indicated you are. Though you haven't clarified what the panel is you 
referred to or in what capacity you are involved.


From my own perspective, I would like to hear other views whether the enquiry 
is interested or capable of taking them on board or not - I think they are

relevant to the governance of ICT.

Marghanita




 Saying your
not interested in viewpoints that may diverge from your enthusiasm for this
enquiry doesn't encourage any positive input what so ever.


I am not asking about positive input, I am asking about constructive
input. I am no more or no less critical about the potential of a
positive outcome of this effort. But at least I can say I tried to
help.


By the way the chair of the committee who wrote this report was Brand Hoff
of Tower Software




Thanks for the constructive input. :-)

Cheers,
Silvia.




--
Marghanita da Cruz
http://www.ramin.com.au
Phone: (+61)0414 869202


--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Silvia Pfeiffer]

Marghanita,

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Marghanita da Cruz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sylvia,
>
> If people bother to reply to you, they are  not claiming defeat, just
> questioning whether it is worthwhile putting any effort into another
> government enquiry - particularly one labelled "innovation".

Why bother replying to me then as I have obviously already decided to
put in some effort? If it's not worth putting effort behind the
activity why waste time telling others to not bother either?

>  Saying your
> not interested in viewpoints that may diverge from your enthusiasm for this
> enquiry doesn't encourage any positive input what so ever.

I am not asking about positive input, I am asking about constructive
input. I am no more or no less critical about the potential of a
positive outcome of this effort. But at least I can say I tried to
help.

> By the way the chair of the committee who wrote this report was Brand Hoff
> of Tower Software
> 
> 

Thanks for the constructive input. :-)

Cheers,
Silvia.
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Marghanita da Cruz]

Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Marghanita da Cruz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Perhaps a change of government could improve things.


We have had a change of government (and note: we have been talking
federally on this thread all the time). The new government stopped a



I think that we should give this government and this review a chance
to get it right and I think we should contribute constructively to
getting it right, instead of already bashing an activity that hasn't
even started yet. I you're one of those people who throw up their arms
in the air and claim defeat before even having tried to make a
constructive change, I don't want to hear from you. (This is not a
reply to Marghanita, but rather towards the way in which this thread
has been received both on the SLUG and the LA mailing lists).


Sylvia,

If people bother to reply to you, they are  not claiming defeat, just 
questioning whether it is worthwhile putting any effort into another government 
enquiry - particularly one labelled "innovation".  Saying your not interested in 
viewpoints that may diverge from your enthusiasm for this enquiry doesn't 
encourage any positive input what so ever.


By the way the chair of the committee who wrote this report was Brand Hoff of 
Tower Software




Marghanita




...and for good measure one I drafted in 1998.
Submission on Ministerial Council Statement - Towards an Australian Strategy
for the Information Economy



This sounds like constructive input and I will have a look. Thanks a
lot for that pointer.

Best Regards,
Silvia.




--
Marghanita da Cruz
http://www.ramin.com.au
Phone: (+61)0414 869202

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Silvia Pfeiffer]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Marghanita da Cruz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps a change of government could improve things.

We have had a change of government (and note: we have been talking
federally on this thread all the time). The new government stopped a
lot of the existing R&D spend to re-evaluate the situation and
consider new ways of investment into Australian R&D. The review has
been undertaken publicly with an ability for anybody in the country to
submit their point of view and suggestions for improvement. The
submissions to the review are public and can be seen at
http://www.innovation.gov.au/innovationreview/Pages/home.aspx .

If you and David have so many issues with the way the last and the
current government are/have been managing R&D investment in Australia,
I am amazed that you did not make a submission to this review and
provide constructive input such that it may be improved.

More generally speaking: I have recently discovered a tendency in
Australia that I am starting to really hate. We are very quick at
cricising the government and any sort of institutional work that is
being done. But when the opportunity comes to make constructive input,
all that is being heard is more criticism and bashing and finger
pointing and saying how much brighter and greener it is in other
people's gardens. It is simply not true that things are so much better
elsewhere - we have a very solid industry here and some solid R&D work
is going on. We have a lack in taking the R&D work in ICT (and yes: it
is mostly a problem of this industry) into production and making the
most of it for Australia. Rather than continuing to be negative about
it and blame everyone else for not getting it right, maybe we should
analyse and actually find out why this is the case.

I think that we should give this government and this review a chance
to get it right and I think we should contribute constructively to
getting it right, instead of already bashing an activity that hasn't
even started yet. I you're one of those people who throw up their arms
in the air and claim defeat before even having tried to make a
constructive change, I don't want to hear from you. (This is not a
reply to Marghanita, but rather towards the way in which this thread
has been received both on the SLUG and the LA mailing lists).

> ...and for good measure one I drafted in 1998.
> Submission on Ministerial Council Statement - Towards an Australian Strategy
> for the Information Economy
> 

This sounds like constructive input and I will have a look. Thanks a
lot for that pointer.

Best Regards,
Silvia.
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Marghanita da Cruz]

Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:


I do  however agree that innovation should lead towards the
development of new products. Helping the government decide how to
direct money towards achieving that goal is what this review is all
about, so let's be nice and constructive about it.


Sylvia,

I share David's skepticism and would even venture he is being extremely polite
given the reality.  Perhaps a change of government could improve things. I would
guess the responses received to the review would reflect two things - those who
felt they needed to respond and a gap reflecting those who felt it a pointless
exercise.

The biggest and most useful source of government funding is it's contracts.
There used to be a local content/industry development component but that is gone
and maybe it didn't work. However, given the size of the Australian market if
these contracts/customers are denied to local companies (to not just develop
technical but
leadership experience) then anything else the government does is just whitewash.

Though having also been on the other side it isn't an easy task. Innovation
requires
good risk management and leadership skills in the customer organisation.

Reward without risk? Innovation in PFI, Matthew Tulley, Winter 2001


There are lots of reports around about innovation, particularly through ICT,
which might make useful background reading.

Report to Senator the Hon Hlen Coonan, Minisgter for Communications, Information
Technology and the Arts introducting the PRAGMATIC Programe (Procurement Reform
of Australian Government Major Acquisition from Telecommunications and IT
Companies developed by Industry Members of the ICT SME Joint Industry Government
Working Party, sponsored by the Australian Computer Society, February 2005


Achieving value from ICT: key management strategies


Digital Factories: the Hidden Revolution in Australian Manufacturing, 2005


...and for good measure one I drafted in 1998.
Submission on Ministerial Council Statement - Towards an Australian Strategy for
the Information Economy


There are a good number of successful non primary industry companies in
Australia, but I suggest that this is despite the government not because of its
programs.

The challenge is getting the right framework in place. Co-incidentally I have
been looking at this from a governance/ethical perspective and would welcome
comments [on or off list] on this paper I have prepared [for a book chapter].


Marghanita
--
Marghanita da Cruz
http://www.ramin.com.au
Phone: (+61)0414 869202






--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

> Just for your information: I do not work for the government nor is it
> any of the stuff on www.innovation.gov.au my website.

David, please note the above.

Secondly Silvia is one of the innovators.

If you are running a desktop Linux system your distro is likely
to have software which Silvia helped to create on it. Silvia
played a leading role in the development of Annodex:

http://www.annodex.net/

Siliva also played a huge role in getting the Ogg encapsulation
format registered as an IETF standard.

Currently Silvia runs a small startup here in Sydney specializing
in web video. Silvia is a coder, and a lot of the code behind
her startup is code Silvia wrote.

Since Silvia is very definitely an innovator and not one of the
government bureaucrats that you were spraying bile at, I really
think you owe her a very sincere apology.

Regards,
Erik
-- 
-
Erik de Castro Lopo
-
"If the thought of switching editors doesn't fill you with quite a bit
of dread, what you're using now is almost certainly underpowered, and
you definitely haven't customized it enough."
-- http://codeulate.com/?p=12
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Re: submissions to National Innovation System Review

[Silvia Pfeiffer]

Hi David,

Only just saw this earlier email of yours.

Just for your information: I do not work for the government nor is it
any of the stuff on www.innovation.gov.au my website.

I also think you misunderstand the relationship between winning a war
and owning a share in a company, but I don't really see a point in
starting a discussion on that.

I do  however agree that innovation should lead towards the
development of new products. Helping the government decide how to
direct money towards achieving that goal is what this review is all
about, so let's be nice and constructive about it.

Regards,
Silvia.


On 22 Jul, 06:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quoting Silvia Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Hi all,
>
> > If any of you have made a submission to the National Innovation System
> > Reviewhttp://www.innovation.gov.au/innovationreview/Pages/home.aspx,
> > I'm on a panel discussing this topic and I'd like to find out what
> > people's concerns were.
>
> Well you'll be rich soon - most people worth their salt in the  
> Australian Government find it pretty easy to siphon off the  
> development funds. Just one way I've heard of is.. a) find not enough  
> (good) projects to invest in.. b) find a recognised fund manager.. c)  
> move the funds to via the fund-manager to singapore where it can be  
> collected less a commission... d) collect your money and go. Best  
> thing is - all above board... nothing illegal in that. That's what  
> happened with the $700 million grants from NOIE a few years ago...  
> happy if you prove me wrong..
>
> But seriously...
>
> What good is innovation if it isn't directed towards good quality  
> saleable products ?
>
> That's basically what the world wants.. nothing else...
>
> The fact is that Australia has had so many opportunities to be a  
> player in the global technology market but our Government has thwarted  
> those opportunities for its people.
>
> For example, look at our involvement in Korea.. now a technology  
> powerhouse... Australia was there - during the Korean war. We sent  
> troops to Korea and a lot of our soldiers get killed. We win the war  
> and had the whole country at our disposal.
>
> Our government then walks away - following orders I guess. At the same  
> time, other governments, a bit more loyal to their citizens, supply a  
> stream of their own people into Korea and fund them with money to  
> rebuild (and own) the country.
>
> 20 years later Korea is transformed from an Agricultural backwater to  
> high-tech powerhouse. All the other participants share in 25%  
> ownership of the countries industry.
>
> Except for Australia of course.. we get to buy some flowers for some  
> missing loved ones who were told they were doing it for their country.
>
> Exactly the same thing happened in Japan in WWII.. with unconditional  
> surrender Australia could have owned 25% of Sony, Mazda, Mitsubishi...  
> all or any of them... what do we own now - about 0.0001 of 1%.. quite  
> shocking..
>
> And now, China's market is booming... so what does Australia do about  
> it apart from commodities ? nothing... absolute zilch...
>
> Send our young people there? give them our endorsement like the  
> British or Germans ? i'm not hearing it..
>
> We must not kid ourselves into believing the government spindoctoring.  
> Our government is anti-innovation - and I am not picking up how any of  
> this is actually getting Australian products into the worlds products  
> stream.
>
> David
>
> --
> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List -http://slug.org.au/
> Subscription info and FAQs:http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html