Live data from Hacker News

How the U.S. became a science superpower

steveblank.com

21–30 of 529 posts

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#21
post #8
post #2

If you read nothing else in this excellent post, read the conclusion: > A key component of this U.S. research ecosystem was the genius of the indirect cost reimbursement system. Not only did the U.S. fund researchers in universities by paying the cost of their salaries, the U.S. gave universities money for the researchers facilities and administration. This was the secret sauce that allowed U.S. universities to build…

[flagged]

What “outcome” would meet your standards for justifiable research spending? Is a 26% cap on the percentage that indirects can go to all administration - all staff apart from researcher hours directly dedicated to the project - a sufficient “outcome”?

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#22
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impossible since that would mean extreme left wing radical socialism. And communism.

Really? Is that your honest take? It's either late stage unfettered capitalism, regulatory capture and oligarchy OR communism? Edit: I forgot theocracy.

Yeah, sarcasm does not work on internet, I know. I tried to paraphrase the ruler in chief.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#24
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reminder that in a democracy, it's probably best to make sure the gold is widely shared. Lest the poorly educated masses of people without access to the gold vote to kill the goose.

Impossible since that would mean extreme left wing radical socialism. And communism.

Unless there could be a less black and white option in the middle?

Like a bit more taxes on the wealthiest, a bit more social safety nets for the neediest?

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#25
post #9

Being the sole western industrialized nation that hadn't just had most of their infrastructure bombed to rubble can't have hurt.

Canada and Australia are smaller but surely count as industrialized western nations (Canada is like 9th by GDP) whose infrastructure was not bombed to rubble.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#27
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What “outcome” would meet your standards for justifiable research spending? Is a 26% cap on the percentage that indirects can go to all administration - all staff apart from researcher hours directly dedicated to the project - a sufficient “outcome”?

I’m talking about the part where he talks about the government funding indirects specifically, not the research funding in general.

> A key component of this U.S. research ecosystem was the genius of the indirect cost reimbursement system

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#28
post #9

Being the sole western industrialized nation that hadn't just had most of their infrastructure bombed to rubble can't have hurt.

The US provided billions in aid and resources under the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and especially Japan after the war. And provided billions again to Korea after the Korean War. Japan and South Korea obviously made the most of it with their massive science and technology industries in the post-war era.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#29

We are killing the golden goose

While currently it’s open season on the golden goose in America, the golden goose has been under attack for decades. Academia has a strong publish-or-perish culture that I believe is stifling, and industry has become increasingly short-term driven.

Ironically, one of the frustrations I’ve had with the research funding situation long before DOGE’s disruptions is the demands from funders, particularly in the business world, for golden eggs from researchers without any regard of how the research process works.

A relevant quote from Alan Kay: “I once gave a talk to Disney executives about "new ways to kill the geese that lay the golden eggs". For example, set up deadlines and quotas for the eggs. Make the geese into managers. Make the geese go to meetings to justify their diet and day to day processes. Demand golden coins from the geese rather than eggs. Demand platinum rather than gold. Require that the geese make plans and explain just how they will make the eggs that will be laid. Etc.” (from https://worrydream.com/2017-12-30-alan/)

I dream of a day where we see more places like the old Bell Labs and Xerox PARC, and where universities strongly value freedom of inquiry with fewer publication and fund-raising pressures. However, given the reality that there are many more prospective researchers than there are research positions that potential funders are willing to support, it’s natural that there is some mechanism used to determine which researchers get access to jobs and funding.

Post reply on HN