A big myth often told in the tech world that things are developed by startups using private equity. We often forget the large and dynamic public sector. Biggest "VC" in the world is DARPA and other US government entities. EDIT: I meant to say, it's a big myth the tech industry tells the public.
DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
61–68 of 68 posts
Re: DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
#62DARPA is an impressive VC. Could it make sense to apply their approach to other areas?
It's a grant though. I assume no strings attached like a VC.
Either way: Damn, money well spent. This one success may have justified all the other “failures” or gains that haven’t materialized yet.
Re: DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
There wasn't a WWIII just because some russian dude once thought "eh, maybe it's just a glitch". USA can't take credit for preventing WWIII when it was one russian guy's single decision away from becoming exacltly half of the WWIII.
Yes, the US can still take a lot of credit. Just because the Soviets didn't officially screw up and get everyone killed (thanks to Stanislav Petrov), that does not detract from the stabilizing effect the US as a superpower has had overall (yes, local wars like Iraq have caused local instability) in preventing massive wars between global powers that would inevitably kill tens of millions of people. The US superpower a…
Russia took offence with that. USA insisted on being hegemon, phrasing simple conflict of interest as good vs evil situation, escalating the whole thing to the point where we were just one guy's decision away from being bombed back into the stone age.
Whatever stabilizing influence having world hegemon might have is nullified by the fact that USA insisting on being the hegemon nearly wiped us all.
If Russia went to war with USA, cities in Poland were the targets for american warheads.
And that stabilizing influence is somewhat debatable too. USA discourages some wars while actively encouraging others. Last few years Europe suffered huge wave of political destabilization due to immigration crisis cause in huge part by US sponsored conflicts south.
China will definitely take offence if USA insists on staying world hegemon, just as it takes offence now with being treated like third class citizen by western countries that should know their place, so best thing USA could do for the world peace is to learn how to take a second place among many, behind economy that will soon become superior to theirs in all measures, not just growth.
USA is not unique. It's not good (except for some minor mishaps). It is just a country about as moral as average one that got lucky in WWII, then got to be central bank for world economy and is cutting coupons since then while getting slowly overtaken by nearly every other economy.
Re: DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pfizer was the first vaccine approved and wasn't part of Warp Speed.
” Company representatives said in November that "the company is part of Operation Warp Speed as a supplier of a potential coronavirus vaccine,"[60] and that "Pfizer is proud to be one of various vaccine manufacturers participating in Operation Warp Speed as a supplier of a potential COVID-19 vaccine."” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed
https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/nov/19/pfizer-modern...
The U.S. government did not fund the companies’ research and development.
Pfizer chose to risk its own money on vaccine research and not take federal funding in order to avoid bureaucracy and politics, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla said. He said its investment so far was at least $1.5 billion.
"I wanted to liberate our scientists from any bureaucracy," Bourla told CBS in September. "When you get money from someone that always comes with strings. They want to see how you are going to progress, what type of moves you are going to do. They want reports. I didn't want to have any of that.
"Basically I gave them an open checkbook so that they can worry only about scientific challenges, not anything else," he said. "And also, I wanted to keep Pfizer out of politics, by the way."
Re: DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
The U.S. isn't empire building. It's mainly a policy of retaining superpower status for world peace. Containment of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea is largely the defining policy of the last 70 years. Of course tons of blunders like Vietnam and Afghanistan. Tragedies. But there has not been a World War III nor have there been large scale wars killing a sizable portion of the populace such as most wars pre-WWII.…
> But there has not been a World War III nor have there been large scale wars killing a sizable portion of the populace such as most wars pre-WWII. This is as much if not more of a result of Mutually Assured Destruction due to nuclear weapons. Humanity finally built something so destructive we had to collectively choose not to use it because the only way to win that game is not to play it. Now it's all proxy wars, cy…
Tell people exactly why they're dying again, see how many SpecOps get fucking cancelled.
Re: DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
There wasn't a WWIII just because some russian dude once thought "eh, maybe it's just a glitch". USA can't take credit for preventing WWIII when it was one russian guy's single decision away from becoming exacltly half of the WWIII.
Yes, the US can still take a lot of credit. Just because the Soviets didn't officially screw up and get everyone killed (thanks to Stanislav Petrov), that does not detract from the stabilizing effect the US as a superpower has had overall (yes, local wars like Iraq have caused local instability) in preventing massive wars between global powers that would inevitably kill tens of millions of people. The US superpower a…
> preventing massive wars between global powers that would inevitably kill tens of millions of people.
Everyone thinking this is the default in today's era is clearly disconnected from the priorities and thoughts of the citizen.
That is to say, most modern nations, you will not find someone pissed off at people in far lands that they'll volunteer to go flying or sailing after them without means and motive given to them.
Re: DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
” Company representatives said in November that "the company is part of Operation Warp Speed as a supplier of a potential coronavirus vaccine,"[60] and that "Pfizer is proud to be one of various vaccine manufacturers participating in Operation Warp Speed as a supplier of a potential COVID-19 vaccine."” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed
Pfizer sold vaccines to the US government. That money came from Warp Speed. That's basically the full extent of Pfizer's involvement in Warp Speed. I choose to call that non-participation, but it's a subtle argument. https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/nov/19/pfizer-modern... The U.S. government did not fund the companies’ research and development. Pfizer chose to risk its own money on vaccine research and not ta…
A big part was the coordination between multiple government agencies, negotiation with suppliers for guaranteed volumes, throwing money at the problem when needed.
Pfizer doesn’t need money. It makes billions in profit each year. But it does need the FDA, DOD, CDC, etc all aligned and a clearly laid out path from development, to approval, to distribution and eventually administration.
The R&D is just a small part of it.
Re: DARPA Awards Moderna a Grant for Up to $25M to Develop mRNA Therapeutics (2013)
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see that BioNTech was founded in 2008. Moderna was founded in 2010. I guess that like many advances, mRNA was (and still is) a new, promising technology that prompted people to found companies to bring it to the market. Moderna, as an American company, probably simply went to see DARPA when they were looking for funding because of the potential of the technology.
Both are based on the work of one scientist Katalin Karikó She had a pretty tough time getting her work accepted at the time - no one would fund it, she got demoted, everyone said it wouldn’t work etc - as is the way with all genuinely new ideas! This is a really good write up - her story starts about half way in. https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingmar_Hoerr
https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/curevac-gruender-und-mrna-pion...