[flagged]
Notably DARPA felt the need to do this because they didn't trust private industry to do it on their own; with no money in driverless cars, the government figured industry would get there only if there was some catalyst, which they provided (successfully).
If you only ever go where the work is, then you're going to be left behind by societies that have a vision and leadership that will work to make it real.
I assure you, private R&D is voraciously reading published publicly funded papers.
It's a significant PR issue that this misconception about how R&D works gets propagated ad nauseum.
I’ve seen “behind the curtain” in both private and publicly funded research. I can’t think of a single area where private industry isn’t standing on the shoulders of collective advancement. (I speak from experience as someone who holds a degree in one of the fields I’m about to mention.)
The biggest leaps tend to be made as a result of public-private partnerships. For example, essentially the totality of fundamental knowledge relating to aeronautics and aerospace, advanced medicine and life-saving pharmaceuticals (especially drugs for orphaned diseases), and any of the examples already offered in this thread.
Private ownership of scientific knowledge isn’t inherently a bad thing, but locking it up indirectly by virtue of eliminating all public funding for it does nothing more than to invite a new corporatist driven Dark Age.
Cyberpunk 2077 is a fun place to visit on the screen. I guess some people do want to live there.
What makes it artificial?
[EDIT] Rather, yes, of course it's artificial, what do you mean by bringing that up? Corporations and money are also artificial, so... what does that matter? In fact, all research is artificial.