>>8

Since I don’t understand, I’ll have the researcher give a presentation or ask about the research results.

If you can’t answer, your budget will be cut, that’s all.

>>43

It’s fine, but the reality is that I can’t even become second place.

>>92

If someone aiming for first place ends up in second or third, then it makes sense that someone aiming for second place wouldn’t be able to achieve second place.

>>92

Which story?

>>40

It can’t be helped.

Let’s fabricate it.

>>6

The very idea that considers promoting science as a betting ticket and suggests that we should only invest in what is likely to hit…

>>4

>>4

Meritocracy is also facing this issue.

The result is that there is proper evaluation without being able to conduct a proper evaluation!

In the end, the likes and dislikes or misunderstandings of those in power dominate.

>>7

>>10

So it’s strange to compare it to horse racing in the first place.

>>21

The problem is that what seems obvious to some people isn’t as clear as they think.

It’s not research, but for example, until the aging infrastructure updates or the situation in Saitama is brought to light.

It was clearly a waste of tax money by the obvious vested interests in the construction industry.

>>32

There must be a lot of unnecessary research that can just be discarded, and that preconceived notion is the problem.

>>32

If you’re properly inspecting it, that would be a problem for me.

>>21

Everyone understands the ideal theory, but…

>>21

Yes

It has already been determined that indiscriminately distributing at least a small amount will have a more effective impact.

Is second place not good enough?

Would cutting social security for those who cannot work lead to the development of society?!

Just buy Le Maire!

Political policies are similar, as the results come after a level of 5 to 10 years.

Is this why we’re focusing on domestic production in industries like AI and drones that are already established in other countries?

>>20

One reason for focusing on semiconductors, AI, and drones is that if we leave it to others, there is a risk we won’t be able to get supplies when we really need them.

Unlike horses, various fields of basic research combine to become applications and results, so it’s better to buy broadly.

>>26

Ah, I said it.

>>26

If we finance through government bonds and go bankrupt, then whatever will be, will be! Isn’t that fine?

After all, collapse is unavoidable, right?

Trying to only select and buy winning tickets is

Trying to buy all the bets is foolish for both sides.

WIN5 can sometimes be profitable even if you buy all types.

You can close your eyes to the fact that several hundred million yen is needed for the initial investment.

I think it’s better to be able to properly evaluate things afterwards rather than predicting them in advance.

In the past, we could allocate budgets for various research, so as a remnant of that time, we were able to win the Nobel Prize in recent years.

Currently, research is being held back quite a bit, so results are not coming out, and it’s said that it will be quite difficult for Japanese people to win the Nobel Prize in the future.

In fact, many of the award winners had already warned about that.

>>33

This is often said, but whether it’s America or China, if it turns out to be meaningless or not yielding results, they are cut off without hesitation.

>>47

There is a world of difference between cutting someone because they aren’t producing results and cutting them because it seems they won’t produce results; do you understand what I’m saying?

I wonder how the big shots decide on the distribution of money in reality.

I don’t know what it’s used for, but it’s a waste of nutrients, so let’s remove it!

Drones, AI, power assist.

For some reason, not investing money in research that is expected to grow.

Japan is pouring tax money into a nonsensical NPO called support for impoverished women, isn’t it?

>>50

Well… there is a little.

>>50

That NPO providing poverty assistance hasn’t issued receipts for years, and the female leader has gone on overseas trips with her boyfriend six times, embezzling at least 160 million yen, while not giving even a single yen to the impoverished people.

>>120

When I hear about 160 million yen with politicians and friends in an NPO, it reminds me of Koki Ozora, but that was a man.

Where on earth is this story from…?

Well, if an amateur tries to talk about politics based on a whim, they’ll say some strange things, right?

I often do it too.

What’s the current rank of someone who can’t be second?

Of course, there has to be some level of review since resources are limited, but still…

It might be a valid management strategy to pour money into a business that others have successfully identified without exploring it themselves, but what happens if the government does that…?

The one who actually did it below was the Chinese government.

With the constraint that anything that does not yield results within a year is not recognized.

Isn’t it the government’s job to spend money on the cultivation of fundamental technologies that cannot be developed by the private sector…?

Someone who seriously hates women has shown up, hasn’t he?

By the way, have you seen results from your concentrated efforts?

>>57

I’m just scraping and not focusing.

>>60

Damn~

>>60

Well, there are probably more young people who, after having their field cut down, move away from academia to jobs in companies than those who start research from scratch in a different field…

If you mean that money is being given to incoherent people instead of to research that shows promise for growth, then I think it would be better to talk about EM bacteria or dream fuel.

The issue of not receiving basic research funding is not only a problem in Japan.

>>59

If it makes money, companies are doing fundamental research, right?

If you think scientific research is a field of gambling on par with horse racing, then that’s true.

I think there is a problem on the side that could not explain to outsiders why being second place is not acceptable.

If you have a proper estimate that there is potential, then that’s good, isn’t it?

Is the person who drew this a leftist?

>>66

It seems quite painful to only be able to label others.

There was someone who discovered the basic theory of fiber optics before the war, but since it was an era without the internet, it was looked down upon as a useless pastime and apparently no patents were even obtained; that story is interesting, isn’t it?

>>67

It’s a common story from the past that there were many cases where they wouldn’t even let you obtain a patent.

Well, it’s probably because it’s not as easy to manage as it is now…

>>68

The radical welfare all-in faction tends to have that kind of ideology.

>>75

Isn’t that rather a small government or a neo-liberal way of thinking…?

>>78

Under neoliberalism, it’s total cuts to welfare, right?

No, China was already doing this.

Budget allocation focuses fully on advanced technology while ignoring basic research.

So the foreign investment was withdrawing, and things were getting bad…

>>69

Mr. Uyo, your frustration is showing.

Not many people know that GE, which became the origin of “select and concentrate,” has become critically ill because of it.

>>73

We hardly hear the name GE anymore, right?

I don’t quite understand how the result of selection and concentration leads to Rapidus and JDI.

>>81

Hint: Under-the-table money

There are so many people who ignore their accumulated failures and claim they’re winning overall, almost as if they have memory issues…

>>83

It has been revealed that only the memories of winning parts are strongly rooted.

>>83

Every time an event happens with the Matsuo Laboratory at the University of Tokyo or in AI, I’ve been saying “Now is Japan’s chance to win” for years.

I wonder when we will win.

>>88

I think it’s somewhat of a type of complex business strategy.

If I bring this word up, both the right and the left will be hooked.

>>88

Is there even a commercial victory for AI in the first place? Putting that aside, the fact that open source has become incredibly excellent is actually an opportunity.

>>83

It is a war record.

The image is that basic research in the US is ultimately being done by companies like GAFAM.

>>85

It can be said that it is possible precisely because of the wealth extracted from around the world.

In a sense, it might be more like a government than the government itself.

I understand that there are winning tickets that you don’t realize are winning.

If you know it’s a hit, then buy it.

>>87

If it’s known to be a hit, private companies will invest, so the government no longer needs to do it.

If we don’t compare cases where budgets for unproductive research weren’t cut, then ultimately this image is just post hoc rationalization.

There is no research that can only be done with the world’s number one supercomputer, so it doesn’t necessarily have to be the top supercomputer in terms of computations.

Wait for me.

Just let me know which reply bothered you.

I wonder why something that even ordinary people like us can understand can’t be understood by the esteemed officials…

>>99

Because we were born differently.

>>99

To put it in a way that ordinary people can understand, it’s that there are more people receiving taxes than paying them, so the idea that things will get better by doing this is almost non-existent and we’re already in a tough situation.

>>99

Regarding the Renho’s cat issue, it seriously ended up like this.

>>107

I understand you dislike the opposition, but at least if you’re going to criticize, let’s make it something related to research…

The conversation could also lead to the question of whether any research with a name attached can receive funding.

While there may be variations in the intensity of constraints, we are still focusing and concentrating our efforts.

As soon as it comes up in conversation about China, someone who gets angry appears.

If I could aim for first place in anything and everything, then of course I would do that.

Stop dreaming forever.

It’s just that things are going as they will, including for the big shots.

Rather, it has developed too much in the past.

It also relates to the industrial base.

If fundamental research is not solid, the quality and level of components will fall behind those of other countries.

Divide equally among all the studies.

>>108

In extreme terms, that’s fine.

Even if the budget is increased 100 times, the results won’t be 100 times greater.

You should be able to recognize a strong horse.

And the odds for strong horses are low, right?

>>109

In other words, many promising researches already have plenty of pioneers, which means there’s little profit in it.

>>110

That would make anyone snap…

>>110

Unfortunately, these kinds of pseudo-researchers often have politicians backing them… Well, I guess it’s because they’re good at deceiving people.

>>110

Is this slander against the Japanese government promoting Hiyasshi?

It’s been several years since this happened, but the idea that second place is not good was originally based on the premise of cutting the budget, rather than just being a critique.

It’s a field where being second is not acceptable, yet there are those who cannot coherently explain its importance or societal contributions while continuing to make flowery claims like, “I want to aim for number one in the world!” and “I want to give dreams to the people!”

In the end, the external parties that can properly provide answers intervened with the government, resulting in being excluded from the project evaluation, which later connected to Fugaku and contributed to society through droplet spread simulations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

I don’t care about the content, but I dislike people who imitate others’ art styles while trying to express their own opinions.

Using parody artwork for political satire damages the image of the original source.

Is this a gutter trash?

>>121

You seem to like anti-AI stuff.

If research budgets are allocated based on the market evaluation (annual salary) of graduates, it can be distributed efficiently.

>>122

I hear that in America, all the intellectuals become stockbrokers, and there are few who aspire to be researchers.

>>135

Research globally doesn’t turn into money.

If you just want to be rich for one generation, there are other ways to make money.

Research is aimed at benefiting the lives of future generations, but those future generations are not necessarily people from one’s own country… Especially in the case of technologies used in warfare, this pattern is quite common.

Well then, when it comes to whether Muraki Kazumi is fake and has produced no results, I don’t think it’s something that can be judged solely based on rumors on the internet.

It might be that they’re just pretending to be clever like Kongming and treating the losing tickets like amateurs.

>>124

Hiyasshi really doesn’t produce anything genuine.

They don’t have an answer for how to keep the absorbed CO2 fixed, just putting a fancy surface on a middle school level CO2 absorption reaction, and they keep avoiding it by insisting that the number of parts is large in the LCA calculation.

To be clear, it’s a scam.

The budget needed for research has also become quite insufficient, being double what it was 10 or 20 years ago.

The prices of cutting-edge machines are not the only concern; the increases in costs for gas, glass vials, solvents, and consumables are also severe.

Because global warming is progressing, there are certainly priorities that should be emphasized in research on measures to combat global warming depending on the era.

>>126

But it’s just greenwashing…

>>126

It’s something that should be thrown away first.

Is being in second place not good enough?

Even if a product of the same quality and price as the top country is developed, buyers and users would likely choose the product from the top country over the second place country.

I believe that being ranked first in technological prowess is necessary for the country.

>>127

If the premise is that it doesn’t matter unless you come in first place, then at that time, the supercomputers were in a losing situation.

It ultimately concludes that cutting the budget is reasonable…

>>133

“I’m annoyed because Renho said it, but it’s wrong, as it’s mentioned first.”

>>127

Until recently, even though it was said that AMD’s CPUs had better cost performance, Intel was still selling better because brand power and track record are important.

Well, right now is not the time for that.

>>127

Why is it not acceptable to aim for second place instead of insisting on budgeting to take first in the world?

Even though I just asked a common question, there are still idiots who keep bringing it up.

Moreover, I couldn’t respond to that properly.

You know that fields like semiconductors and displays are so overwhelming when they hit that there’s really nothing you can do even if you focus a bit, right?

Simply put, Japan is a middle-ranking country, so we can’t spend money on everything.

If I had done this when I had money, I probably would have turned out with a few things instead.

>>136

What you should do when you have enough money to buy three Americas is not land flipping, but acquiring foreign capital.

>>141

That’s true, but the people doing land speculation only have the talent for land speculation.

>>153

If you buy them all, you’re bound to get at least one win.

Fundamentally, there isn’t enough lobbying by scientists.

It’s just that I’m being stirred by the village tree.

>>138

Stirring… stirring?

>>138

That’s why we need someone like Edison.

No matter which country it is, if you can’t present well, they won’t give you money.

>>159

That’s right.

This research will be useful to the country!! If we can’t make a compelling argument, the government won’t provide funding.

>>159

That’s right.

In the end, it all leads to business, so if you’re not good at speaking, you won’t survive.

>>159

To be frank, pseudoscience tends to present a more appealing narrative, and it’s better for presentations; simply presenting facts can’t compete with deception.

I want to say that researchers shouldn’t be left responsible for the cost of literacy education for recipients.

Since the budget is not unlimited, selection and concentration are necessary, but there are no absolute standards.

If we start to be strict about it, we need to establish criteria for the person who decides the criteria for making those choices and focusing.

It ends up being like that, and I can’t do anything…

There’s no particular need for supercomputers to have the top calculation ability.

>>147

But it’s not good to back out of the competition.

>>156

Instead of competing to see if we can create the number one supercomputer, why not compete in terms of the number of supercomputers that are easy to use for research?

>>161

The performance of supercomputers is determined by how many GPUs can be secured these days, and when trying to gather a certain number…

If we were to compare it to horse racing, doesn’t it end up being a discussion about not investing in anything at all?

>>148

Stock investment might be the right fit.

Let’s only buy NVIDIA of the future.

>>148

In the first place, it’s a discussion about not treating research as if you should just buy winning tickets like in horse racing.

If we can accurately identify the future value of research that currently shows no expected results and make precise investments, wouldn’t science advance?

>>150

Isn’t this a discussion that puts investment and gambling on the same level?

>>150

The person who drew this must be someone who has never been involved in research at all, just like those who live in the 23 wards and say we shouldn’t kill bears.

Don’t spend money on useless things like edible crickets! Even the anonymous person was saying that, right?

>>158

People who say edible crickets are a waste are just basically idiots!

Also, we haven’t provided as much public funds as you say!

Foreign capital purchased in Japan is bound to decline, so it’s impossible.

That said, supercomputers are a fundamental pillar of research that is required in many studies.

That delay compared to other countries affects other research capabilities.

>>162

In any case, since it’s a method of renting part of the computing power, there’s rarely a need to use the full specs, so it’s not necessary to be in first place.

That said, Japan has repeatedly withdrawn after trying and failing to make advancements, which is why it holds patents for the foundational aspects.

Professor Yamanaka is no longer doing research; he is just focused on fundraising now.

Research has a large return, so isn’t it like a lottery with a carry-over where you buy everything and end up in the positive?

It’s not like all scientists in America are good at presentations either.

A partner who can find and pull out such things is strong.