I like your comparison to TRLs. I think we’re saying the same thing, actually! I don’t mean that one is exploitation and one is exploration exclusively. Re-reading my post, the phrase “gap” might be a misnomer — it’s more like a balancing act of priorities.
> How would you ensure you explore something useful? How would you ensure to transfer what you explored, so you can exploit that knowledge? What if you exploitation is stuck in a local minimum, how would you ensure you send feedback back to exploitation?
I’d argue you can’t necessarily be sure. Not all research works out. But we need to ask questions and get answers to move forward, even if what we discover may not be worth exploiting (getting tired of my own phrasing). Getting stuck in local min/maxima is part of why we need both angles. This is the flip side of what I said about industry needing to build systems that work — lower budget for risk tolerance, but also increased likelihood of getting stuck in a local optimum.
It sounds like I’m using those terms to describe the same spectrum you are with TRLs. At least, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said — the “but how” portion sounds exactly like the symbiotic overlap/crossover I had in mind.
I guess to answer my own original question, it sounds like you’ve swung back and forth a few times?
> Then why don't we create a system that allows people to quickly switch hats, as required to achieve larger goals?
Preaching to the choir ;) and appreciate your perspective
> I guess to answer my own original question, it sounds like you’ve swung back and forth a few times?
Indeed, I couldn't decide if I want industry or academia. What I (think I) want is to experience the whole innovation pipeline, from TRL 1 to 9. I'm now working 80% in industry and 20% in academia, and it satisfies my intelectual needs, both to explore moonshots and to get sh*t done. :)
> How would you ensure you explore something useful? How would you ensure to transfer what you explored, so you can exploit that knowledge? What if you exploitation is stuck in a local minimum, how would you ensure you send feedback back to exploitation?
I’d argue you can’t necessarily be sure. Not all research works out. But we need to ask questions and get answers to move forward, even if what we discover may not be worth exploiting (getting tired of my own phrasing). Getting stuck in local min/maxima is part of why we need both angles. This is the flip side of what I said about industry needing to build systems that work — lower budget for risk tolerance, but also increased likelihood of getting stuck in a local optimum.
It sounds like I’m using those terms to describe the same spectrum you are with TRLs. At least, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said — the “but how” portion sounds exactly like the symbiotic overlap/crossover I had in mind.
I guess to answer my own original question, it sounds like you’ve swung back and forth a few times?
> Then why don't we create a system that allows people to quickly switch hats, as required to achieve larger goals?
Preaching to the choir ;) and appreciate your perspective