"If you want to minimize the possibility of unexpected breakthroughs, tell [scientists] they will receive no resources at all unless they spend the bulk of their time competing against each other to convince you they already know what they are going to discover." - David Graeber, The Utopia of Rules.

@neuralreckoning

Damn does that hit close to home. We literally spend most of our research money putting together demos for the next round of proposals...

@neuralreckoning
I knew you would love this book
@jonny get used to seeing a lot of it being quoted by me in your timeline. 😉
@jonny @neuralreckoning I would say anything Graeber is great. So sad he passed away not so long ago.

@neuralreckoning @djvanness

In Canada, NSERC’s “Discovery Grants” would be more appropriately called “Keep Doing What You’ve Been Doing From The Beginning Or We Will Not Give You Money”

@neuralreckoning I love this. I also welcome ideas about better strategies for distributing limited resources to scientists. More shared resources would be a start.

@neuralreckoning This minimization looks like a part of a complete "technology system" as defined by Ellul's book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Technological_Society

It's a paradoxical position: a tool (e.g., proposals) is first designed as a mean to make a situation more efficient, then this tool becomes a complete system that transforms "itself" as inefficient.

The question is thus: how to design a tool that avoids the paradox? Maybe Illich's book sketches ideas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tools_for_Conviviality

The Technological Society - Wikipedia

@zimoun oh interesting. I loved Ellul on propaganda, should read those.