[jamesbritt]

And it's really hard to look at the Shuttle program and say yes.

How effective/efficient would a tax-payer supported version of Xerox PARC or the Golden Age Bell Labs be?

Something more pleasant than DARPA, for example.

[russell]

Funny thing about that. Bob Taylor ran ARPA and then Xerox PARC. May be that he was his own golden age.

[maaku]

Nothing funny about it. The analogy is good. Garrett Reisman, astronaut, joins SpaceX:

http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20110304

The time of NASA-monopoly (DARPA) is fading, and the time of commercial space (Xerox PARC/Bell Labs) is just beginning. But it really shouldn't be anything for anyone should get worked up over--Xerox PARC/Bell Labs ushered in golden age of innovation and wealth creation, and DARPA still exists and still does amazing things.

[ippisl]

You can't compare it this way. Xerox Parc and DARPA are research organizations.

NASA is a research and development organization. they products that are used in real life.

Usually development and deployment cost much more than pure research.

[protomyth]

What is your problem with DARPA?

[jamesbritt]

It has a military focus. I'd like to see devlopment with a broader scope. Like how to teach more people to read. Or farming.

[protomyth]

In the US, USDA funds a lot of farming research and DoE has its own labs for energy research.

Military and Space seem to have a lot of civilian offshoots. Probably because of focus and demanding environments / specs.

[artmageddon]

Fair enough, but keep in mind that DARPA did bring us the internet...