4 ms·
I'd say that in this respect most researchers operate very similarly to startups that are often featured on HN. Seems a bit unfair to say the research should be
by ckemere 7y ago
I'd say that in this respect most researchers operate very similarly to startups that are often featured on HN. Seems a bit unfair to say the research should be closed down without saying the same thing, e.g., about Uber/Lyft, Doordash, or even Amazon (insofar as they are all promising to revolutionize something and make money sustainably)?
That is not to say that the HBP wasn't widely perceived as ridiculous from the outset by people with relevant technical knowledge. I think the bottom line is that we should respect scientists that are able to cast an audacious vision, raise crazy amounts of money, and then actually deliver, e.g., Christoph Koch/Allen Institute.
- roywiggins 7y agoPublicly funded research must be held to a higher standard. Investors can throw their own money at whatever, but when you're throwing someone else's money, there's a duty to actually communicate to the public what you're spending it on.
- nicoburns 7y agoInvestors being wasteful with money is a good argument for them not having it in the first place (and having a more progressive taxation system dustribute that money). There is still a cost to society of investors throwing away "private" money.
- roywiggins 7y agoMy current favorite evidence for this cost is Gates' horrendous attempt at reshaping education https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2018/06/29/bill-gates-spent-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-to-improve-teaching-new-report-says-it-was-a-bust/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2018/06/...