I'm still very uncomfortable with the title and some of the implied rhetoric — this "faster" idea is troubling.
-
-
however, as you noted, perhaps it's unfounded, given the person is going to promote dialogue and heed past experiences.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I guess time will tell...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
'
@arokem@JohnBorghi I want to underline, the concept "faster science" almost by definition implies bad science and questionable practices.2 replies 2 retweets 13 likes -
If I could add my $0.02 to this. I agree that making science “faster” doesn’t mean its better
1 reply 2 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ar0mcintosh @o_guest and
2/5 Part of the issue here is the long time it takes from discovery to translation, which is where funding helps.
1 reply 3 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ar0mcintosh @o_guest and
3/5 When a problem is scale, e.g., a mouse brain atlas (
@Allen_Institute ), acceleration thru industry-type funding & practice can help1 reply 3 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ar0mcintosh @o_guest and
4/5 BUT when a problem has no clear answer yet (cure for Alzheimers), faster is not necessarily better - you can't think faster with more $$
1 reply 3 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ar0mcintosh @o_guest and
5/5 We need to be careful about over-promising just b/c the $$ is there. Overpromising & underdelivering severely strain credibility
1 reply 3 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ar0mcintosh @o_guest and
ok, back to working on my grant application now



1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Thanks for input & good luck! Yes, you're right, damage easily done, adding to "experts know nothing" meme.
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.