6 ms·

Spending money on research is one thing. Making it count is another. We spend enormous amounts of tax payer money on research that isn't reproducible. Lots o

Spending money on research is one thing. Making it count is another. We spend enormous amounts of tax payer money on research that isn't reproducible. Lots of research isn't published. Research that is published is often produced in paid journals that restrict access. We need to upend the research industry. We need more of a sci-hub approach to research and less of an elsevier approach.

DoofusOfDeath 7y ago
I suspect your points are spot-on, but I wish we had concrete numbers associated with your bullet-list. Otherwise I'm not sure if I have things in proper perspective.
melling 7y ago
Sure. That’s a separate problem. If we spend $1 and only get 50 cents worth of research, we should try to spend the money more effectively. Then if we double the research spending and double the effectiveness, we’ll get 4x the research.
krick 7y ago
Exactly. It's naïve to think money is the problem. It's not like you can pile up a $1B in cache, make a huge bonfire out of it and cure some deadly disease for all humanity forever just like that. If it was, I'm pretty sure you could find a million people on the planet to donate a $1000 on average for that cause. But in reality, you are unlikely to get a $1000 from me even for the cause I find extremely important. For all I know, my money is going to end up in the pocket of some medical research center director, who is basically a politician and a fraud, with an income far surpassing mine to start with. And the new car he buys will provide zero help to solve the problem. Basically, I believe much more that government will spend my tax money wisely (which I don't believe, obviously), than I believe academia is able to somewhat efficiently convert money into solutions. And it doesn't matter if I'm right or wrong, it only matters that I'm not the only one like that, and it isn't even a human problem as much as the nature of how things are: and that exaplains, why the whole "there's so much resources(/money) in the world, why cannot we..." argument is silly.

DoofusOfDeath 7y ago

I suspect your points are spot-on, but I wish we had concrete numbers associated with your bullet-list. Otherwise I'm not sure if I have things in proper perspective.

melling 7y ago

Sure. That’s a separate problem. If we spend $1 and only get 50 cents worth of research, we should try to spend the money more effectively. Then if we double the research spending and double the effectiveness, we’ll get 4x the research.

krick 7y ago

Exactly. It's naïve to think money is the problem. It's not like you can pile up a $1B in cache, make a huge bonfire out of it and cure some deadly disease for all humanity forever just like that. If it was, I'm pretty sure you could find a million people on the planet to donate a $1000 on average for that cause. But in reality, you are unlikely to get a $1000 from me even for the cause I find extremely important. For all I know, my money is going to end up in the pocket of some medical research center director, who is basically a politician and a fraud, with an income far surpassing mine to start with. And the new car he buys will provide zero help to solve the problem. Basically, I believe much more that government will spend my tax money wisely (which I don't believe, obviously), than I believe academia is able to somewhat efficiently convert money into solutions. And it doesn't matter if I'm right or wrong, it only matters that I'm not the only one like that, and it isn't even a human problem as much as the nature of how things are: and that exaplains, why the whole "there's so much resources(/money) in the world, why cannot we..." argument is silly.