Comments on: Ernie’s 3D Pancakes: Basic Research Funding: RIP? http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2005/04/12/ernies-3d-pancakes-basic-research-funding-rip/ Daniel Lemire's blog is about life in academia, research in Computer Science, wondering how we can reconcile fast databases and algorithms with the informal and asemantic nature of the world around us. It is broadcasted from Montreal (Canada). Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:30:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Daniel Lemire http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2005/04/12/ernies-3d-pancakes-basic-research-funding-rip/#comment-2305 Daniel Lemire Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:52:01 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2005/04/12/ernies-3d-pancakes-basic-research-funding-rip/#comment-2305 As far as I can tell Einstein didn't ask nor did he receive funding. Surely, as a Princeton professor, he had lots of support, but this was after he made some significant breakthroughs. And one could argue that he would have made just about the same contribution with a pretty ordinary professorship with no special funding. Second of all, it was quite easy for Einstein, should he have cared to, to explain the impact of his work and how it can benefit society. If anything, explaining how light can become electricity is pretty interesting work. Then you ask "who is determining value"... well, what's your alternative? That we don't even try to determine the value of one's work and just provide funding more or less randomly? We have to make decisions, and they can't be made entirely by one's peers... If everyone in a given field thinks that research on AIDS transmission is important, but if, also, everyone in a another field thinks that cold fusion is the most important think, and in another field, they thing that nanotechnology is the big thing... how are you going to decide who gets what amount of money? Frankly, I only see one criteria: how is it expected to benefit society. Sure, you'll get it wrong, partly, but that's the name of the game. And if people say "I do fundamental research, I don't have an explanation for how it can be good for society", then tough luck. As far as I can tell Einstein didn’t ask nor did he receive funding. Surely, as a Princeton professor, he had lots of support, but this was after he made some significant breakthroughs. And one could argue that he would have made just about the same contribution with a pretty ordinary professorship with no special funding.

Second of all, it was quite easy for Einstein, should he have cared to, to explain the impact of his work and how it can benefit society. If anything, explaining how light can become electricity is pretty interesting work.

Then you ask “who is determining value”… well, what’s your alternative? That we don’t even try to determine the value of one’s work and just provide funding more or less randomly? We have to make decisions, and they can’t be made entirely by one’s peers… If everyone in a given field thinks that research on AIDS transmission is important, but if, also, everyone in a another field thinks that cold fusion is the most important think, and in another field, they thing that nanotechnology is the big thing… how are you going to decide who gets what amount of money?

Frankly, I only see one criteria: how is it expected to benefit society. Sure, you’ll get it wrong, partly, but that’s the name of the game. And if people say “I do fundamental research, I don’t have an explanation for how it can be good for society”, then tough luck.

]]> By: Neil http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2005/04/12/ernies-3d-pancakes-basic-research-funding-rip/#comment-2304 Neil Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:37:29 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2005/04/12/ernies-3d-pancakes-basic-research-funding-rip/#comment-2304 If, as you say, funded research must justify how it will benefit society, I see two issues: One problem is determining what will be of value. I'm not convinced you can always look at, say, a grant application, and immediately see what the benefit is. Would *you* have funded Einstein, as a pre-doctoral student, who claimed light was really made of particles? The second is who is determining the value. What one person claims is useful may not seem important to someone else. For example, a study looking at AIDS transmission in U.S. truck stops seems important to me. But apparently others in the U.S. government thought not. If, as you say, funded research must justify how it will benefit society, I see two issues:
One problem is determining what will be of value. I’m not convinced you can always look at, say, a grant application, and immediately see what the benefit is. Would *you* have funded Einstein, as a pre-doctoral student, who claimed light was really made of particles?

The second is who is determining the value. What one person claims is useful may not seem important to someone else. For example, a study looking at AIDS transmission in U.S. truck stops seems important to me. But apparently others in the U.S. government thought not.

]]>