I'd say "shouldn't" or we have pieces of shit like Epstein funding scientists working on eugenics projects and and Monsanto ghost-writing papers saying that their products "definitely don't" cause cancer and they're extremely fine to use, trust me bro.
Actually, there's a model for replacing private funding in research. Especially for fields like pharmaceuticals which rely heavily on it. All we need is the will, and for people to vote.
6 Comments
1dalm@lemmings.world · 7 pts · 173d
Can't or won't?
Insekticus@aussie.zone · 7 pts · 173d
I'd say "shouldn't" or we have pieces of shit like Epstein funding scientists working on eugenics projects and and Monsanto ghost-writing papers saying that their products "definitely don't" cause cancer and they're extremely fine to use, trust me bro.
aviationeast@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 173d
If I had a billion dollars, I would be funding at least a few mad scientists, so let's go with won't.
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 173d
The privatization scam is what led to fascism
berg@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 172d
Private money cannot replace public funding
of scienceFtfy
roofuskit@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 173d
Actually, there's a model for replacing private funding in research. Especially for fields like pharmaceuticals which rely heavily on it. All we need is the will, and for people to vote.