←back to thread

280 points dargscisyhp | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
m101 ◴[] No.44765789[source]
UCLA has an endowment of 3.8bn$. Whilst I'm sympathetic to their desire to be further government financed for the work they do, I feel like government financing should be made available to those that actually need the money. The attitude that you have access to government funds even if you have the ability to pay yourself needs to change.
replies(8): >>44765839 #>>44765844 #>>44765941 #>>44765982 #>>44766058 #>>44766567 #>>44766832 #>>44768509 #
noelwelsh ◴[] No.44765982[source]
Governments typically fund research because 1) it's seen as beneficial for the country, and hence falls under the remit of governments in democratic countries and 2) the uncertainty, time frame, or lack of direct commercialization of research typically means the private sector will not invest in it.

Your suggestion is saying that research should be privatised, and shows very little thought about how research works and who benefits from it.

replies(3): >>44766035 #>>44766444 #>>44766753 #
aborsy ◴[] No.44766035[source]
Research 50 years ago, sure. Research now is very different. It’s short term, chasing money, trends, citations, prestige, hierarchy, academic power, and applications. Public should fund only the useful part of it.
replies(2): >>44766224 #>>44766646 #
1. margalabargala ◴[] No.44766646[source]
Nothing has changed. What you describe today existed 50 years ago, and what you describe as being research 50 years ago, exists today.

The actions of the administration serve to force all academics not behaving as you describe research to start doing so, though. The criticism you have, is manufactured.