Hi all,
There's a lot of shaking up going on in the area of education, but one thing that hasn't really been modernized is research funding. I think crowdsourcing academic research/distribution might be an interesting way for academics (or even non-academics) to collect funding, rather than applying for grants. This can be used to fund, for example:
-Research that is not easy to get grants/public funding for
-Costs of doing research (paying participants, cost of research instruments, travel costs, etc.)
-Publication and/or internet hosting fees
I'm curious of anyone on HN has arguments for or against this model?
You would be shocked how fast money goes, even if you are super thrifty with it. As an example, I used one gram of a particular reagent each week. One gram of this compound costs $200. I ran that experiment for almost a year, once per week. That's $10k for a single reagent.
If you factor in all the other costs of the experiment (culture media, weekly rat, tissue culture plates, poly-l-lysine for coating plates, nitrocellulose for blotting, antibodies for westerns (going at $600 for 50uL), assorted reagents, etc etc ad nauseum), the price of my single experiment for a year skyrockets into easily $20k.
That's one technician, working on one part of one tiny paper, working on one insignificant detail of how the human brain works.
Life-sciences is downright, stupidly expensive.
Edit: Sorry, that came across sounding curmudgeonly and bitter. Any lab would be thrilled to receive an extra $20k in funding - it would help pay for a technician to run an experiment.
Just be warned going into it that you will be making a very tiny dent in how things work.