Hacker News Reader

"Understanding unknowns" is a perfectly good motivation for a grant - it just means that instead of seeking a grant to do X, you'll be seeking one for what amounts to a feasibility study on X-like stuff; this is not a bad thing for either 'impact' or 'risk tolerance'. Of course, it goes without saying that work where there are fewer "unknowns" to explore will be funded more directly.

View on HN

But that assumes X is not an unknown, which is kinda the point. "X-like" is an easy pill to swallow for people who want to reduce risk, since they already know X.

If you just want to poke a stick at some lesser known Y, it's harder to appeal to those who want to understand potential returns on their investment.

And it seems that there was a time that predictability, and even returns, was less of a priority. I can't recall the podcast (maybe Planet Money) but they mentioned Vannevar Bush pushing for the government to act as a patron for sciences, and to take on risk that private investors would avoid. Like, spend up to find a new X, then let the private sector step in and develop the X-likes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com