> Many important discoveries are found by chance. And a lot of extremely important basic research is not obviously important until some flashy result is achieve

> Many important discoveries are found by chance. And a lot of extremely important basic research is not obviously important until some flashy result is achieved, if ever. Funding this is almost a lottery... I do not find this persuasive. Is the argument really "we have no idea how to fund science, so we might as well use it as a social justice tool?" While many salient discoveries are found by chance, most science is done deliberately, not at random. We did not get to the moon, split the atom, or develop electric cars by chance. Even chance results are often found by very good scientists, because fortune favours the prepared mind. I'm also unconvinced by "Forcing diversity in funding may be a way to disrupt endogamous tendencies". Frankly, from my POV, this is about as credible as "joining the Jonestown cult may be a way to cure suicidal ideation". See also https://cspicenter.org/reports/increasing-politicization-and-homogeneity-in-scientific-funding-an-analysis-of-nsf-grants-1990-2020/ https://cspicenter.org/reports/increasing-politicization-and....