theres very few hard problems left in accelerating a given field 1) 10x more dollars, and tolerating the dead weight loss 2) cutting the number of decision makers on a committee 3) interrogating gating for journal acceptance
Show this thread
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Improving grant-making is really hard, though. Currently, funding mainly depends on citations and media coverage, and it’s not obvious how to change that without replacing the whole system UR-style.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thoughts on
@newscienceorg ? Could “competitive pressure” from them force grant commitees to wake up -
new science is good-- would have to be 1b times the $ to be a competitive pressure unfortunately-- but very good in the abstract
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t think that it’s just a supply side problem. There’s also a lot of scientists who never learn to articulate why their work is important. Kind of the difference between being a scientist and a Professional Scientist.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How about talent investing tied to say 50-years bond structure? Long term financial vehicle, not reliant on government wim or academia decisions, yet taking into account length & risks associated with research n R&D. I am obsessed over investing in fundamental science at scale
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.