Re: How come it wasn't open source?
You don't know academics or academia very well...
Research is funded with the intention of generating revenue. At the moment in cancer research there is a stronger focus on treatment development, and interest and activity in understanding and curing it is waining. Some of that is driven by results - there have been improvements in treatment and no one has really made much progress really understanding it for a cure, but the fact that treatment is a more profitable approach has biased that.
The charities too are leaning that way: there's an indefinite source of donations whilst it remains incurable, whereas if they actually found a cure then it's game over for the the cancer charity industry.
The status quo suits a lot of people very nicely... Of course, no one will ever say that's what is happening, but if one looks at what is getting funded and published, there is a swing taking place.
Bill Gates has previously complained about the difficulties in getting researchers to work on dull but important topics.
Overall academia has been pretty naive in its approach to China, having for a long time chosen to ignore the human rights abuses and follow the money.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
