8 ms·

Without giving a strong opinion either way on whether this particular project is a good investment or not : Science, as an institution imo undervalues good mar

Without giving a strong opinion either way on whether this particular project is a good investment or not : Science, as an institution imo undervalues good marketing and good PR. For profit enterprises are under no illusion that they can succeed without good marketing and public perception. If large expensive projects like this are needed to increase public awareness and support for basic scientific research then I am all for them. Society is willing to spend billions on projects that give no tangible return and are all perceptions (for example, sports stadiums) so if some of that instead is spent promoting Science that’s a good thing. Any actual discoveries in fundamental science that come out would be a bonus too, but getting people excited about research is an end unto itself.

Aerroon 6y ago
I think a problem with ITER for PR isn't the cost. It's time. I learned about it and got excited more than a decade ago. It'll still take years of time for it to be finished. I'm not really sure how to express this, but the huge amount of time just diminishes the impact of it for me.
- godelski 6y ago
  One could also argue that it would be developed faster if they had more money. It wouldn't be a linear relationship, but there is a definite relationship between the two. But fundamentally I agree. It is hard to stay excited about something to come for decades.
- layoutIfNeeded 6y ago
  I have similar feelings about the James Webb Space Telescope too.
- nitrogen 6y ago
  Think of it like the construction of a legendary cathedral. The prolonged commitment required is part of its impressiveness.
  - mac01021 6y ago
    With a legendary cathedral, the layperson can walk up to it at any time and easily perceive its ever-waxing size and majesty. This is something a fusion reactor doesn't have (I guess they could do tours or something maybe?).
    - nitrogen 6y ago
      They do have a YouTube channel showing construction.
- GoblinSlayer 6y ago
  There are people whose imagination ITER exceeds.
- Turbots 6y ago
  I wrote a paper in high school on ITER in 1999 :-)
godelski 6y ago
This is why I'm particularly upset about SSC's[0] failure to be built. There are many advantages to housing the smartest scientists in the world within the borders of your country, and those benefits aren't limited to scientific output. After all, a big part of these multi-national projects is the culture war. And let's be real, which is worth more? A super collider that runs for decades or the F35 (which cost more, but we'll pretend they are the same and that America would be the only one funding a multi-national facility)? Fun (perspective) fact: any of the top 30 billionaires in the world could personally pay for one of these colliders. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider
- enaaem 6y ago
  I can actually argue for the F35. F35 and Carrier groups ensures open oceans and secure maritime trade for all. 90% of global trade is over the sea and is worth Trillions of dollars. There were times when countries would actively block maritime routes and steal cargo. A well integrated global economy, with open and secure maritime trade is beneficial for everyone and particularly the USA.
  - hef19898 6y ago
    That would be done by frigates, destroyers and corvettes. Carrier groups are needed to dominate conflict theaters and other countries by projecting power. Totally agree on open trade. And as far as the F-35 is concerned, I think it was an attempt to be the end-all NATO, and global, fighter craft. Didn't work out that good, so far at least.
- valuearb 6y ago
  My software startup was a huge beneficiary of the SSC cancellation, it freed up a nuclear physicist to write graphics software for us, which became one of our biggest products. I’m in favor of pursuing basic research, but there is always a cost. When you take a group of your smartest people and focus them on non-economic activities, the economy loses something.
Jugurtha 6y ago
> Science, as an institution imo undervalues good marketing and good PR. For profit enterprises are under no illusion that they can succeed without good marketing and public perception. Not to mention, this could be an attraction. Sell tickets for guided tours. I would gladly give money to have a guide walk me through that. Granted, at $100 a ticket, and 10,000 people a year, it'll take 20,000 years to recoup the investment. Therefore, they need to make ITER romantic to have millions of people flock to rekindle an affection as powerful as the sun, and fuse humans as ITER fuses atoms. You need to create a ritual. A couple would go, each holding a cup of water in their hand. They would then pour the water into the system as individual cups, and ITER would fuse atoms forever. Now you can have millions of couples instead of two people like me. Apparently, there are 80 million people per year who visit the frigging mall in Dubai. Many also visit the Eiffel tower, which was built for an exposition by the way.
- ksm1717 6y ago
  Man, you’re just giving out ideas like this for free?
  - Jugurtha 6y ago
    They also have to change the name. ITER --> GLITTER, to go with the fusion --> sun --> star theme.
    - philwelch 6y ago
      Not all that GLITTERs is gold.
- imtringued 6y ago
  They could have a theme park with lots of different reactor designs!
- MayeulC 6y ago
  Well, I did visit ITER back in 2014, it was really nice, we went on a tour, saw the facilities, attended a presentation, saw models of the reactors, etc. It was all for free (but the train ticket). We were a small (6) group of students who asked if a visit would be possible, and we were pleasantly surprised by the answer. There was at least one other family with us, so it's not just students. Making money isn't really the goal for ITER, though. PR and education is. The tour left us with a pleasant feeling about ITER, but we weren't the ones to convince. I didn't see that kind of tour advertised in any brochure.
TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
Might be better if, when trying to promote your passion, you don’t bash others. I’d argue getting people excited about sport, and society as a whole playing more of it, is an unbounded good. I even know some research scientists who play sport recreationally, and follow professional-level sport. Plenty of room and resources for both!
- landryraccoon 6y ago
  I absolutely agree with you. Sports are good. But it's an arbitrary good, because it's determined culturally. The rules of soccer could be changed at any time, and it would probably be just as exciting. Soccer is fun because we all agree it's fun, and no other intrinsic reason. There's no reason we can't get excited about a monument to science the same way. If we have to spend billions just to get excited about science (without producing actual research), we should do it, just as we spend billions on sports just for fun and not because it produces any physical goods.

Aerroon 6y ago

I think a problem with ITER for PR isn't the cost. It's time. I learned about it and got excited more than a decade ago. It'll still take years of time for it to be finished. I'm not really sure how to express this, but the huge amount of time just diminishes the impact of it for me.

godelski 6y ago
One could also argue that it would be developed faster if they had more money. It wouldn't be a linear relationship, but there is a definite relationship between the two. But fundamentally I agree. It is hard to stay excited about something to come for decades.
layoutIfNeeded 6y ago
I have similar feelings about the James Webb Space Telescope too.
nitrogen 6y ago
Think of it like the construction of a legendary cathedral. The prolonged commitment required is part of its impressiveness.
- mac01021 6y ago
  With a legendary cathedral, the layperson can walk up to it at any time and easily perceive its ever-waxing size and majesty. This is something a fusion reactor doesn't have (I guess they could do tours or something maybe?).
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    They do have a YouTube channel showing construction.
GoblinSlayer 6y ago
There are people whose imagination ITER exceeds.
Turbots 6y ago
I wrote a paper in high school on ITER in 1999 :-)

godelski 6y ago

This is why I'm particularly upset about SSC's[0] failure to be built. There are many advantages to housing the smartest scientists in the world within the borders of your country, and those benefits aren't limited to scientific output. After all, a big part of these multi-national projects is the culture war. And let's be real, which is worth more? A super collider that runs for decades or the F35 (which cost more, but we'll pretend they are the same and that America would be the only one funding a multi-national facility)? Fun (perspective) fact: any of the top 30 billionaires in the world could personally pay for one of these colliders. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider

enaaem 6y ago
I can actually argue for the F35. F35 and Carrier groups ensures open oceans and secure maritime trade for all. 90% of global trade is over the sea and is worth Trillions of dollars. There were times when countries would actively block maritime routes and steal cargo. A well integrated global economy, with open and secure maritime trade is beneficial for everyone and particularly the USA.
- hef19898 6y ago
  That would be done by frigates, destroyers and corvettes. Carrier groups are needed to dominate conflict theaters and other countries by projecting power. Totally agree on open trade. And as far as the F-35 is concerned, I think it was an attempt to be the end-all NATO, and global, fighter craft. Didn't work out that good, so far at least.
valuearb 6y ago
My software startup was a huge beneficiary of the SSC cancellation, it freed up a nuclear physicist to write graphics software for us, which became one of our biggest products. I’m in favor of pursuing basic research, but there is always a cost. When you take a group of your smartest people and focus them on non-economic activities, the economy loses something.

Jugurtha 6y ago

> Science, as an institution imo undervalues good marketing and good PR. For profit enterprises are under no illusion that they can succeed without good marketing and public perception. Not to mention, this could be an attraction. Sell tickets for guided tours. I would gladly give money to have a guide walk me through that. Granted, at $100 a ticket, and 10,000 people a year, it'll take 20,000 years to recoup the investment. Therefore, they need to make ITER romantic to have millions of people flock to rekindle an affection as powerful as the sun, and fuse humans as ITER fuses atoms. You need to create a ritual. A couple would go, each holding a cup of water in their hand. They would then pour the water into the system as individual cups, and ITER would fuse atoms forever. Now you can have millions of couples instead of two people like me. Apparently, there are 80 million people per year who visit the frigging mall in Dubai. Many also visit the Eiffel tower, which was built for an exposition by the way.

ksm1717 6y ago
Man, you’re just giving out ideas like this for free?
- Jugurtha 6y ago
  They also have to change the name. ITER --> GLITTER, to go with the fusion --> sun --> star theme.
  - philwelch 6y ago
    Not all that GLITTERs is gold.
imtringued 6y ago
They could have a theme park with lots of different reactor designs!
MayeulC 6y ago
Well, I did visit ITER back in 2014, it was really nice, we went on a tour, saw the facilities, attended a presentation, saw models of the reactors, etc. It was all for free (but the train ticket). We were a small (6) group of students who asked if a visit would be possible, and we were pleasantly surprised by the answer. There was at least one other family with us, so it's not just students. Making money isn't really the goal for ITER, though. PR and education is. The tour left us with a pleasant feeling about ITER, but we weren't the ones to convince. I didn't see that kind of tour advertised in any brochure.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago

Might be better if, when trying to promote your passion, you don’t bash others. I’d argue getting people excited about sport, and society as a whole playing more of it, is an unbounded good. I even know some research scientists who play sport recreationally, and follow professional-level sport. Plenty of room and resources for both!

landryraccoon 6y ago
I absolutely agree with you. Sports are good. But it's an arbitrary good, because it's determined culturally. The rules of soccer could be changed at any time, and it would probably be just as exciting. Soccer is fun because we all agree it's fun, and no other intrinsic reason. There's no reason we can't get excited about a monument to science the same way. If we have to spend billions just to get excited about science (without producing actual research), we should do it, just as we spend billions on sports just for fun and not because it produces any physical goods.