3 ms·
Exactly. I've written about this at length because people who don't have much experiences in the hard science/engineering fields have a vast disconnect between
by FD3SA 12y ago
Exactly. I've written about this at length because people who don't have much experiences in the hard science/engineering fields have a vast disconnect between what's possible in software vs. what's possible in the physical world. Startups are great for pure software and very simple and constrained science/engineering experiments. These, by definition, won't be groundbreaking.
Big science/engineering is very expensive, very long term and very risky. No one wants to foot the bill. Not corporations, not investors, and recently not even governments (NIH/NSF funding cuts, etc.).
I discuss this further here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8337837 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8337837
- AnonJ 12y agoBy "physical world" we don't necessarily have to do some groundbreaking theoretical physics discovery. Software like online collaboration tools, marketplace apps and search engines have already greatly transformed the way people interact and work. Isn't that change "physical"? Way too many people who study "hard science" end up being able to contribute nothing and just drop out of the field, or just passing their time on pointless researches supported by funds. The field was already overpopulated and what makes it worse is that its hard problems are few to come by and solving them requires luck. If you are out of luck then you're wasting your life. This is different from the world of software where you are almost always doing things that have an immediate positive effect on the lives around you.