Preferably get government out of funding Science altogether (or as much as possible outside of National Security (i.e. weapons not climate)).
Remember the days before WWII when it was private or academic endowments that paid for Science. Diversity of funding leads to diverse Science. What’s wrong with that?
Eisenhower warned us about the danger of government control of research funding. We’re seeing that in action. As the meme goes, “97% of scientists approve of those providing their funding.”
“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present–and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Re-prioritize Science funding.
Preferably get government out of funding Science altogether (or as much as possible outside of National Security (i.e. weapons not climate)).
Remember the days before WWII when it was private or academic endowments that paid for Science. Diversity of funding leads to diverse Science. What’s wrong with that?
Eisenhower warned us about the danger of government control of research funding. We’re seeing that in action. As the meme goes, “97% of scientists approve of those providing their funding.”
“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present–and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Not listed, but I think the one that scares me the most is “Gray Goo” and other similar scenarios.