undefined | Better HN

0 pointscrocowhile15y ago0 comments

Government sucks at innovation? What are you talking about? Pretty much everything that is basic science is paid by government in every nation. It is govt that gave us the internet, the bomb, and the man on the moon. Virtually every nobel prize in history has been given to people who worked for public universities.

0 comments

grandalf15y ago

See my other reply:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1465601

detst15y ago

That's not really fair. The government funds more than "development of military technology".

grandalf15y ago

What percentage of the technologies that people cite as being made possible by the government were developed for non-military purposes?

Edit: The NSF started out as a way of enhancing military research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation

1 more reply

dennisgorelik15y ago

1) Please show me "pretty much everything" that government developed in the last 30 years. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1465878 2) "Man on the moon" is pretty much useless for us. 3) Government didn't give us Internet as we know it now. Not even close. Government contributed may be ~1% into Internet (if even that). Considering how much that contribution costs to taxpayers every year -- government performance looks pretty bleak.

crocowhileOP15y ago

1) I have been working as researcher for the past 12 years or so (cancer and neurobiology). Pretty much everything in the field of medical science is founded mainly by public money: this goes for salary and research money. Private contribution is quite minimal and proximal to zero in basic research.

2) Wut? Do you have any idea on the level of technological transfer that space research brings to your everyday life? This goes from materials that keep your home warm to GPS, really.

3) dude, arpanet is a project of DARPA. WWW is a project of CERN. I got money from DARPA and I study fruitflies for god sake.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

dennisgorelik15y ago

1) I see now where misunderstanding is coming from. I'm stating that government is poor at innovating. You are stating that government is a good source of funding. These statements do not contradict to each other. I agree that government funds lots of projects. It's just that practical results are not impressive at all.

2) Considering the cost of "Man on the Moon" project, the benefits for us are pretty slim. If I take from you, say, $10K, and then give you back $3K, I can claim that you should be happy, because I'm helping you by giving $3K. Right? 3) CERN is NOT a government.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

grandalf15y ago

See my other reply:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1465601

detst15y ago

That's not really fair. The government funds more than "development of military technology".

grandalf15y ago

What percentage of the technologies that people cite as being made possible by the government were developed for non-military purposes?

Edit: The NSF started out as a way of enhancing military research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation

1 more reply

dennisgorelik15y ago

crocowhileOP15y ago

2) Wut? Do you have any idea on the level of technological transfer that space research brings to your everyday life? This goes from materials that keep your home warm to GPS, really.

3) dude, arpanet is a project of DARPA. WWW is a project of CERN. I got money from DARPA and I study fruitflies for god sake.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

dennisgorelik15y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse