@paulg I'm confused. Science is normally defined as having no clear market applicability in my book. Once it does it's not science anymore.
VCs invest in science cos because they think they'll make money. (Any other motive would violate their fiduciary obligation to LPs.)
-
-
-
@paulg anywhere I can read up on what they mean by that?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@paulg here's@peterthiel 's take on (not) making money in science:http://youtu.be/5_0dVHMpJlo?t=28m48s …Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
.
@paulg equally accurate if u drop the word “science.” Making $ is the goal. Other positive effects (while awesome) are ultimately secondary -
.
@paulg btw im not saying there arent other good things to do in life/work beyond making $. of course there are. but VCs are investors first
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.