>In line with John’s argument here, we should develop a robust gears-level understanding of scientific funding and organization before assuming that more power or more money can’t help.
How about a metaculus/prediction market for scientific advances given an investment in X person or project? (where people put stake into the success of a person or project?) is this susceptible to bad incentives?
I think the greater concern is that it’s hard to measure. And yes, you could imagine that owning shares against, say, the efficacy of a vaccine being above a certain level could be read as an incentive to sabotage the effort to develop it.
>In line with John’s argument here, we should develop a robust gears-level understanding of scientific funding and organization before assuming that more power or more money can’t help.
How about a metaculus/prediction market for scientific advances given an investment in X person or project? (where people put stake into the success of a person or project?) is this susceptible to bad incentives?
I think the greater concern is that it’s hard to measure. And yes, you could imagine that owning shares against, say, the efficacy of a vaccine being above a certain level could be read as an incentive to sabotage the effort to develop it.