I draw a parallel of what John Maeda is saying of punctuation to that of research: basic versus applied.
Basic research is naturally exploratory, taking winding roads, many of which do not end at any obvious fruitful conclusion. Academia (or independent wealth) is the most nurturing environment for basic research, but from what I've been reading and hearing over the years, that is changing as academia behaves more like business.
Applied research, on the other hand, is focused with deadlines and products in mind. It has the benefit of basic research to pool together concrete concepts and strategies for new technologies and products.
Some few companies can afford to do basic research, most can't or won't. That's why we need academia to do it. If they don't, who will?
A lot of companies team up with universities, and both contribute towards applied research.
I think this is ultimately the best approach, because if you just give academia a bunch of money they will waste it all publishing papers on string theory.
Basic research is naturally exploratory, taking winding roads, many of which do not end at any obvious fruitful conclusion. Academia (or independent wealth) is the most nurturing environment for basic research, but from what I've been reading and hearing over the years, that is changing as academia behaves more like business.
Applied research, on the other hand, is focused with deadlines and products in mind. It has the benefit of basic research to pool together concrete concepts and strategies for new technologies and products.
Some few companies can afford to do basic research, most can't or won't. That's why we need academia to do it. If they don't, who will?