4 ms·
If only we funded science with half of the vigor we do even something as pathetic as Juicero... Edit: for perspective, Juicero raised and blew over $100mil on
by QAPereo 9y ago
If only we funded science with half of the vigor we do even something as pathetic as Juicero...
Edit: for perspective, Juicero raised and blew over $100mil on the promise of something you can get from a salad, while the yearly operating budget for the wildly successful Cassini mission was $60mil.
- overcast 9y agoBecause people funding these companies are out for themselves, not the greater good. They don't care if some new device or app is going to change the world. They only care if it will make them rich. That's the problem. There isn't enough philanthropic venture capitalists.
- inamberclad 9y agoTo be fair, pre-launch development for Cassini was over $1B [0]. There was a massive upfront investment in the mission. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassini%E2%80%93Huygens#Objectives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassini%E2%80%93Huygens#Object...
- QAPereo 9y agoOr 1/9th of a Theranos, amortized over 13 years of discovery rather than flushed down a toilet.
- nonbel 9y agoKeep in mind diminishing returns: http://www.nature.com/news/irreproducible-biology-research-costs-put-at-28-billion-per-year-1.17711 http://www.nature.com/news/irreproducible-biology-research-c...
- Dylan16807 9y agoI wouldn't say that's a problem of diminishing returns. It's a matter of research funding being massively biased toward new ideas and not making old ideas more solid.