this is what you voted for...

Post Reply New Topic

So much for finding common ground.

I tried.

I’m more certain than ever that I made the correct decision to vote now. Along with the majority on this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

I'd expect him to reduce taxes on unearned income.

Something you should read and think about (from the National Library of Medicine):

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8793038/

We have reached a point that is beginning to become an anti-science era in the U.S.A., which will cost everyone dearly in the future. AI will unite humanity, but not the way you think it will.

Funding science through government grants is dead.
But, what about YouTube?
YouTube can provide significant cash flow to content providers.
Scientists may be able to fund their activities via social media, perhaps more efficiently than through the government grant process.

Wouldn't say it's dead, but government funding for science has been slowly decreasing as governments around the western world have been encouraging industry partnerships > blue sky government grants

When you do R&D for the likes of Musk you are largely helping big business to fill their pockets > helping the world

this amuuurican thinks of down under quite often, along with the great white north [Canada] due to a sincere wish that I could be a citizen of those two much more enlightened nations.

I heard Canada once helped save bald eagles from going extinct in the USA be relocating our own bald eagles. Which is a real joke since the red state maggots couldn't care less about endangered animals now.

The majority of science is not flashy enough to catch the viewer's attention and their pocketbook. Too many YouTube providers to compete with on that site to begin with. Not all scientists are good at selling themselves on a video. They might be good to do it on paper (for a grant), but not so much on screen. The other thing is how much detail could one give out on a video before someone else would steal the idea and run with it. Research can be very competitive when tenure is on the line.

Personally, I do not need external funding for my research projects. I would rather fund them out of my own pocket. That way I control what needs to be done and how the data is to be used. Sure, it slows the project down, but I can work with it better that way. Lucky for me, I know how to build things I need on a very small budget. It all boils down to being adaptable. Few scientists know how to do that anymore. Too many of them complain that they cannot get a project published under a budget of $100,000. They are very spoiled because they became accustomed to having the cash flow coming in from grants. I got a project done for under $1000 of my own money. It takes true creativity to do that.

I do have a private channel on YouTube, but not to pull in money or fame. I did it to time stamp a concept that I had come up with for a personal reason.

Accountability for one's actions matters. If anyone has a responsibility to find common ground it's the people who chose to inflict harm, not the people suffering as a result of that choice.

What have you done to find common ground?
What have you done to address the harm you personally chose to inflict?

If you can't answer those questions your I tried comment about desiring to find common ground is dishonest.

Last edited by funeralxempire on 12 Feb 2025, 3:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I published out of my own pocket. And that was 25 years ago. Journals are now becoming open access and are being hit with thousands of digital manuscripts from around the world. Putting aside the cost of publishing (particularly in colour) unfortunately you need to have some connection to the editor or else you are in the back of the queue.