5 Comments
Jun 1, 2021Liked by Timothy Noah

"Who are the end users for the NSF’s new applied-technology directorate? Well, business." Spot on. Thus, what is also missing is innovation *not* intended for commercialization. Innovations in public goods like health and safety. I'd say we could use a few billion in innovation in policing, for example. Ideally, the act would be strategic: here are our 3-5 top national challenges, and here are the tech areas to meet them. Instead we got: here are some fashionable tech areas that are valuable to Google and DoD, and some of that value could trickle down to you, too. I don't mind picking winners; that's inevitable, as you point out. I mind not being explicit about who is winning and who isn't. Thanks for offering clarity, Roland.

Expand full comment

The other thing missing from the (current version of) the Endless Frontier Act is, well, most of the Endless Frontier Act. They gutted it in committee.

https://www.slowboring.com/p/make-the-endless-frontier-act-great

Expand full comment
author

The House, of course, has to weigh in, but as it stands it is a healthy change in direction for levels spending and for how $$ are spent..

Expand full comment

Yeah, passing it would still be an incremental step in the right direction... It's disturbing, though, that more couldn't get through. We need to get a LOT more ambitious about this stuff.

Expand full comment
author

Funding is drastically reduced, yes, and some pork has been added. This link doesn't require a paywall: https://www.niskanencenter.org/how-congress-ruined-the-endless-frontier-act/

Expand full comment