A political choice to put business/venture figures (not traditional scientists) in charge of public research agencies will prioritize talent scouting and high‑risk bets over conventional peer‑reviewed incrementalism, reshaping which projects and institutions get grants. That shift could accelerate breakthrough attempts but also politicize agenda‑setting, change replication incentives, and concentrate influence with entrepreneurial networks.
— If enacted, this governance change would rewire how public science is funded and governed, with long‑run effects on research direction, credibility, and institutional power.
Michael Gibson
2026.03.27
100% relevant
President Trump’s March 2 nomination of Jim O’Neill (former Thiel Foundation associate and HHS/CDC acting official) to lead the National Science Foundation, plus the article’s praise for Thiel‑style fellowships and critique of peer review.
← Back to All Ideas