Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

75% Positive

Analyzed from 3812 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#researchers#research#europe#top#china#netherlands#more#https#years#english

Discussion (148 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

mnky9800n•7 minutes ago
I apologise if this is overly negative. It is based on my experience working as a soft money researcher (my own grants) at a Dutch university. My opinions may not be shared.

In my experience The Netherlands is a rather unsupportive place to do research. There is essentially no money from the government that will pay salaries in full, especially early career salaries (vini, vidi, vici). I have had friends win ERC grants (millions in euros) that were fired as a result because there was not a space in the department to hire them full time (Dutch work law requires contracts to become permanent after a certain number of years of working). Departments also seem to have glass ceilings for non Dutch. Researchers are often given large teaching commitments that cannot be bought out with grants. University incubators seem to be better suited to let professors pretend to be start up founders then actual innovation centers. I have tried on multiple occasions to engage the local incubator and have always been run around. Yet local Dutch have no issues. The rules seem to be different for Dutch than for foreigners. A foreign colleague was offered a lucrative consulting contract (a normal thing for successful professors at other universities). The Dutch university he was at refused to let him take it except under the understanding the money would be entirely consumed by the university and he would receive no compensation for bringing in private money even though he would be doing all of the work. Meanwhile the Dutch colleague in the next office was allowed to start a private consulting agency through the local incubator and spend as much time as he wanted working in the start up. The universities publish reports how progressive they are by evaluating professors on teaching and outreach meanwhile having internal department expectations of PhD students to publish at least four first author papers or are not allowed to graduate (on four year contracts with one year full time teaching commitment). In my experience it is rare that PhD students finish on time. As one adminstrator told me, “university promoters are more interested in promoting their careers then their PhD students” (promoter is the word used for the adviser). The universities also disallow working outside of typical hours and there is no ability to work in your own office on the weekends. Also, recently they defended against this, but it will come up again, the government has discussed changing the tax law such that startup shares will have real world value so new valuations become taxable events.

This all is not atypical to universities world wide. But in the Netherlands I have not found a place that made me feel like I could work to the best of my ability and at the cutting edge. This is unfortunate. It’s nice to live here but I’m leaving to go to greener pastures.

jesdo•about 3 hours ago
Great initiative, and good to see that it has an effect. I'm a bit sceptical about the available funds. 1 million over 5 years is a nice starting package (4+ PhD students), but the availability of overall research grant money in the Netherlands has been under pressure for years and is difficult to acquire. Researchers moving here may find it difficult to acquire further grant money compared to US, at least in CS.
Cthulhu_•about 2 hours ago
It'll be on top of any other grants and funding available for research though.
doctorwho42•about 1 hour ago
Any how much available funding is there in the EU?

One of the reasons that so many researchers come to the US, even with our decline in research funding over the last 30 years, is because the US makes available so much God damn funding in comparison to any western world. The reason China is starting to outstrip the US? Because they are starting to surpass the US in funding. The only downside I have heard from Chinese scientists is that you tend to get pigeon holed for the rest of your career into things the state wants/needs

jltsiren•about 1 hour ago
Because there is less competition for jobs and grants. Europe spends more on academic research (as a fraction of GDP) than the US, but there are more people competing for the funding.
goldenarm•about 3 hours ago
The US is accidentally conducting Operation Paperclip but in reverse. Who will benefit the most from it, China or Europe ?
est31•about 2 hours ago
China is not very immigration friendly to non-han folks, but I guess chinese researchers won't make it to the US and this already will have a great effect on the chinese economy.

Europe is in its own set of problems and it is not in the same situation that US used to be after WW2 (only major economy not affected by bombing).

Europe's problems:

* active major war in Ukraine (lasting longer than Axis/Soviet war in WW2)

* energy supply issues (unlike US it's not energy sufficient and the places that supply it with energy are involved with wars)

* a wall of people aging away from employment and into doctor's and hospital waiting rooms (forcing less investment into research and roads/bridges/railway, more towards stabilizing pensions, healthcare)

* major pieces of the european export economy are being replaced by China (eg chinese car brands eating the lunch of european car brands).

sajithdilshan•35 minutes ago
Europe is not immigration friendly as well if you don't speak the native language, of course one could live in an English speaking bubble, but I'm not sure how feasible it would be in Academia.
lukeinator42•8 minutes ago
It's extremely feasible. English is the defacto language of most research in the EU. I spent some time in Italy during my masters degree and know lots of people who have gone on to research or university instructor jobs in various countries in the EU. You definitely have to learn at least some of the local language for day-to-day life though.
neonstatic•6 minutes ago
Likely not a problem, especially in Academia. A family member is doing Phd in Poland, everyone is English speaking and they have lots of students from all over the world. Could be worse in places like France, where English proficiency is historically lower, but I doubt it would be a factor in higher education.
jasonhong•about 2 hours ago
Whether China is immigration friendly or not is debatable. However, here's a recent announcement from last week:

Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Omar M. Yaghi joins Tsinghua University full-time https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/info/1244/14984.htm

fg137•16 minutes ago
The keywords in the headline are "Nobel laureate". They are superstars in academia and are getting money, resources and convenience that a tenured US professor cannot dream of. These are extremely rare compared to the number of Chinese professors in US universities.
dzonga•about 2 hours ago
unfortunately people won't see how bad this is.

most of the A.I researchers are already Chinese.

now imagine other talented researchers on their way to earn Nobels - they're already in China & other countries but not visible yet.

this corrupt US administration fxxked the US in ways that will be felt for decades.

Levitz•about 1 hour ago
>Whether China is immigration friendly or not is debatable.

Compared to the US or Europe? No it's not debatable.

No dual citizenship at all, most probably no citizenship. Harder residency. Good luck bringing family there.

Not going to even mention the obscene difference in racism OR the language barrier, both of which are enormous factors.

tasuki•about 2 hours ago
> China is not very immigration friendly to non-han folks

What do you mean? I've never been to China, but know quite a few non-han white Europeans who lived there for both shorter and longer periods of time. Some studied, others worked there.

Cthulhu_•about 2 hours ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_China has a good summary (click through to its sources); as of 2020 there were about 1.5 million immigrants in China, just under 600K of which from Hong Kong/Macao/Taiwan; as of 2023 there's 12.000 people with permanent residency cards, which would be the expats that live and work there without nationalizing.

For comparsion, in the US as of 2023, nearly 48 million inhabitants (14.3% of total) are foreign-born (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_Stat...). Or the Netherlands, 4.4 million of its ~18 million inhabitants are from abroad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Netherland...).

John23832•about 2 hours ago
In total, China has roughly the same amount of immigrants as Ireland.

China is also objectively becoming more closed, not more open.

est31•about 2 hours ago
I've never been to China either. It's a huge country and it probably depends on where you are (hong kong probably friendlier than a random place in the mainland), but from what I heard/read:

* language issues. Many chinese don't speak english. Also a problem in many european countries (esp latin and slavic speaking ones), but at least the european languages are easier to learn. Compare this to Amsterdam, Goteborg, Berlin-Mitte or Kopenhagen where everyone speaks english.

* citizenship is one of the hardest to get in the world.

* I heard complaints about onboarding into the chinese app/digital ID ecosystem.

Zigurd•about 1 hour ago
Though it was years ago now, I did spend a couple of years frequently traveling to China for fairly long stays. I learned enough Mandarin to get by on my own. The "scariest" thing is realizing you might have to walk for an hour in a random direction to come across a landmark like a known metro station or a hotel where you can get a taxi and have the concierge translate your desired destination.

I was mostly in first tier cities, though I did travel through some more obscure places. The worst hostility I experienced was 5 foot tall grandma with sharp elbows determined to cut in line in front of the big stupid foreigner who is passive aggressively placing his wheelie bag in her way.

If you're curious, just go. The cities are amazing, the people are friendly. Even in Beijing you can easily avoid the tourist traps. While it's not as perfectly safe as Japan or Taiwan, I spent a lot of jet lag recovery time wandering the streets late at night. Once I spent half an hour in a taxi garage at 2am at some unknown location after a 45 minute misdirected taxi ride, arranging a ride to my intended hotel. I think that's about as lost as one can get and it was fine.

dataflow•about 2 hours ago
> Europe's problems: [...]

Would it be silly to add "general lack of air conditioning" to that list? I imagine at some point it inevitably stops being a joke and starts being a real problem. Have we reached that point yet? [1] [2]

[1] https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-frances-june-heatwave...

[2] https://www.dw.com/en/heat-wave-european-countries-report-37...

wolvoleo•about 1 hour ago
The finger-pointing by the US about lack of aircon in europe is just a stupid republican talking point. As everything that comes out of republicans these days it's misdirected and purely politically motivated. And it's none of their business anyway. They're just trying to stir up extreme-right sentiment here.

Yes many houses don't have AC. We didn't need it so much until climate change (of which the US is one of the largest contributors no less). But if you move here and care about it just pick a place that has it or where you can install it. It's available if you want it.

It's not a big thing that should be influencing any decision to move. It's just being blown up and politicised because of the current heatwave. Aircon is not prohibited nor frowned upon here, it's just that we didn't really need it so much before and people are still reluctant to invest in it. Especially in the more northern countries it's not really needed anyway, during a heatwave yes but that's a couple weeks a year. Also, it's not a complete solution. Most of us here live outdoor much more, we don't drive cars much so we need to deal with the heat outside anyway.

We also have nice community options like climate shelters here.

pjerem•about 1 hour ago
Europe is lacking AC because we never had to deal with 30°C at night before the last 5-10 years. And for the regions where we needed to (like, around the Mediterranean), guess what, AC is everywhere there.

You know what, me, an European, just received this morning ? The AC unit I ordered.

It's not hard to install AC in Europe, it's just that until a few years ago, we never needed it. The only real blocker today is when you are living in an apartment and the condominium council refuses AC installation for esthetical reasons, but it's something that can change (either by the vote of co-owners, or by law if needed). And if you are renting, you are stuck until the legislation changes and forces owners to provide summer comfort the same way they must provide heating in winter.

gf000•about 1 hour ago
That's pretty regional, countries that historically had warmer summers have them available on basically every house.

Where the heatwave is only recent, there are some bureaucratic issues (like historic buildings should not get "defaced" by the external unit and whatnot), but I think this is way too exaggerated when talking about the whole of the EU.

VWWHFSfQ•about 2 hours ago
> Europe is in its own set of problems and it is not in the same situation that US used to be after WW2 (only major economy not affected by bombing).

Both Japan and South Korea were equally devastated and yet they managed to build world-class technology industries in the subsequent decades. I think the problems with Europe and the EU are a lot deeper than that.

palata•about 2 hours ago
A lot deeper than active wars and energy supply issues???

Europe's economy has been slowing down since 2007, which is the peak of conventional oil. The problem of Europe is that is doesn't have access to abundant energy like the US does. The US likes to think that they have a better economy because they are smarter/work harder, but the reality is simple: abundant energy makes the economy.

fhe•about 1 hour ago
There are any number of smaller region/states that are already benefiting. Singapore comes to mind. Leading labs are all setting up in Singapore and both 1) internally-transferring their previously US-based talents on work visa to Singapore, and 2) using Singapore as a base for Asia hires, mostly notably from China.
amarant•about 3 hours ago
Probably Europe. Seems more attractive for researchers. China is probably too different to be attractive for most Americans.
em500•about 2 hours ago
It's not too different for ethnic Chinese researchers, of which there are a lot in American STEM departments.
Cthulhu_•about 2 hours ago
For a lot of people it's easier to learn English than Chinese - you wouldn't get far if you don't speak the language in China. English gets you very far in Europe though, most research institutions, universities, high end professions, etc already have English as the going language because of the international character of these places.
skeledrew•about 2 hours ago
Chinese are far more open to working in foreign environments/contexts that Americans are, IMO. Just look at the foreign language learning statistics: most Americans tend to only know English, unless their family was fairly recently from a non-English speaking country. Meanwhile the Chinese landing in the US tend to already have decent English education, and dive right into doing what they're there to do.
namenotrequired•about 2 hours ago
Even if not a single researcher goes from the US to China, it may still benefit them
bergen•about 2 hours ago
Is it an accident though? This seems very deliberate
goldenarm•about 2 hours ago
Maybe the current administration underestimates the impact of public research, and thinks Silicon Valley appeared out of nowhere.
Dumblydorr•about 2 hours ago
Either they underestimate, which is ignorance, or they estimate properly and are anti-truth.

What use do propagandists and fascists have for research? It only stands to continually disprove their lies. They obviously hate science and truth and want it gone, to be replaced with cult of personality and Christian nationalism.

usrusr•about 2 hours ago
Not sure if accidentally is the correct term, given the anti-intellectual platform
cdash•about 3 hours ago
This title is such clickbait. All the article talks about is a Dutch fund created to recruit scientists and they have successfully recruited them. At 1 million euros per head.
JSR_FDED•about 2 hours ago
They have the first 34 researchers, all from top universities and institutes. That’s a major achievement, because as the article says, every researcher brings new knowledge as well as a whole international network with them.
Cthulhu_•about 2 hours ago
Exactly; the biggest company in the Netherlands and its products (ASML and high end lithography machines), is built on top of the works of only a handful of researchers. The US nuclear weapons and space programs were similarly built on top of researchers they got from Europe. This is very much NOT a numbers game, and I want to believe top researchers rate their work and the benefit of humanity higher than a country, especially if that country is backsliding.
petcat•about 2 hours ago
> the biggest company in the Netherlands and its products (ASML and high end lithography machines), is built on top of the works of only a handful of researchers.

This is... wildly wrong. ASML is a multi-national company that licenses IP largely from USA and Japan, but also Taiwan and Germany. The actual EUV light source is developed and produced in California by Cymer, which ASML acquired in 2013. But ASML was only permitted to acquire the company under a strict technology sharing and export control agreement with the US government. Additionally, a huge portion of the photolithography research is directly developed (and owned) by US companies and research organizations such as IBM, Albany NanoTech, and SEMATECH.

There is a reason why ASML's next-generation research photolithography machine is currently being installed and developed in upstate New York, and not somewhere in the Netherlands. The same reason that Cymer is still in San Diego instead of being relocated to Europe.

[0] https://www.eetimes.com/asml-to-build-400-million-us-researc...

[1] https://www.eetimes.com/asml-sematech-team-on-manufacturing-...

[2] https://research.ibm.com/blog/euv-center-albany-nstc

VWWHFSfQ•about 2 hours ago
> At 1 million euros per head.

Over 5 years...

Forgeties79•about 2 hours ago
Seems accurate enough to me. That’s not a ton of money to uproot your life over tbh. Shows there’s willingness to leave with a little bit of incentive.
DrSiemer•about 1 hour ago
That money is for the research, not salary
flexagoon•40 minutes ago
Dutch researcher salaries are also pretty high (compared both to median Dutch salaries and academic salaries around the world), so it's still not like you're leaving USA to live in poverty
Forgeties79•about 1 hour ago
Yup I wasn’t confused about that.
andsoitis•29 minutes ago
That's not a truthful translation of the article's headline, BTW.

More correct would be "First international scientists to the Netherlands via the Tulip Fund", which is a far cry from the title as submitted.

eth0up•14 minutes ago
That gave me a bad idea to feed to the right AI:

An idyllic open prairie, with swarming butterflies

Every chair of the Federal Reserve, from inception to present, holding hands. Mile-wide smiles and shiny teeth, breeze blown hair and dragonflies, and a few actual flies

They traipse (stop motion style, Primus style) through fields of vibrant tulips, as far as an eyeball can see

In the background, a Sinatra-esque voice, with intermittent tones of Nick Cave and dissonant interruptions of Les Claypool sings Tiptoe Through the Tulips, with a scintillating chorus of mewing female voices

The wake of trampled flowers spells the national debt.

A storm brewing in the background.

Next Up: Come to Daddy, by AphexTwin

Z4cki•8 minutes ago
How did you find this out? Not sure if its true!
neuronexmachina•26 minutes ago
Official page for the Tulip Fund: https://www.nwo.nl/en/calls/tulip-fund
luma•about 3 hours ago
This reads more like The Netherlands hopes to bribe US researchers into moving to the Netherlands.
vincnetas•about 2 hours ago
why do you call paying someone legally a "bribe" ?
koiueo•about 2 hours ago
Paying government to make laws allowing you to gain extra profits – lobbying (not a bribe)

Paying mandatory but arbitrary amount to a restaurant on top of your bill – tips (not a hidden fee).

Paying someone an official salary – a bribe.

American logic

Cthulhu_•about 2 hours ago
Our Glorious Leader <-> Their Wicked Despot comic comes to mind.
ericmay•about 2 hours ago
In the US we sometimes use the term “bribe” in morally neutral or even positive situations.

It just means giving someone money or a different incentive to convince them to do something they weren’t going to do or were undecided but considering doing and the extra incentive is the catalyst for making the decision.

We also have the legal concept of a bribe but the OP probably wasn’t using it in the legal sense - I.e. accusing the Netherlands of doing something illegal.

Lutger•about 2 hours ago
The money isn't really for the researchers personally, but for doing the research. They are merely offered a job at a time where their jobs are on the line in the USA. And not even that, they still have to apply and compete with top researchers from other parts of the world. Really hard to call that a bribe, even in a morally neutral way. At most you could say the Netherlands - and other European countries - are taking advantages of the situation where the USA is abandoning their top researchers.

But for years it has been the other way around. Top talent from the Netherlands has been moving to the US in order to get funding (and a bigger salary).

nyeah•about 2 hours ago
Sometimes. But bribery is also a crime, so using that word invites comment.
jasonlotito•about 2 hours ago
> In the US we sometimes use the term “bribe” in morally neutral or even positive situations.

I live here in the US. I've NEVER heard the term bribe in a neutral or even positive way. It might be used in a mocking way, as if to mock the idea of bribes, but never seriously.

So, unless you are confusing that mocking nature as morally neutral or even positive, this is incorrect.

floatrock•about 1 hour ago
right, the proper term is "incentive", "tax break", or "economic development fund"
tgv•about 2 hours ago
Then the US used to bribe our researchers. It's tit-for-tat in this case.
Cthulhu_•about 2 hours ago
I for one am still waiting for US tech companies to bribe me to come work for them.
dwa3592•about 1 hour ago
Actually there are many such headlines, just replace the Netherlands with [China, Singapore, Australia, India].
adam_beck•about 3 hours ago
Top researchers in what?
pastor_williams•about 2 hours ago
From what I can tell

AI, quantum, vaccines, cancer, Alzheimer's, mental health, nuclear energy, climate, food security, astrophysics, democratic resilience

There isn't a full list of fields or researchers because of privacy or not all researchers have told their current institutions about the change.

moffkalast•about 3 hours ago
Top. Men.
karmakurtisaani•about 2 hours ago
Who?
28304283409234•about 2 hours ago
And top women: https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2026/07/07/opeens-mochten-we-woord...

Cancer researchers, climatechange, food production, astrophysics, democracy, mental health, Alzheimers, ...

Basically all over the board. But don't worry - you folks still have a president that understands sports really..... REALLY well. /s

lifestyleguru•about 1 hour ago
They are going to live in Netherlands where? In what housing?

Maybe Europe will engage the top American intellectual power into ejecting the real estate prices into orbit.

Advertisement
blastonico•about 1 hour ago
Who are those "top" researchers? and how many?
HelloUsername•about 2 hours ago
derbOac•about 1 hour ago
The last paragraph has some important context:

"De Jonge Akademie, an association of young scientists, warned last year that the fund could end up recruiting academic stars who are not under threat, at a time when Dutch universities were cutting jobs because of government cutbacks. The new cabinet reversed those cuts last month, pledging up to €428 million a year extra for research."

cactusplant7374•about 3 hours ago
Hopefully it isn't lithography researchers.
JSR_FDED•about 2 hours ago
Why hopefully?
drstewart•about 2 hours ago
Will they be exempt from providing ID to post on the internet or nah?
michalpleban•about 2 hours ago
I can post on the Internet whatever I want without providing any ID whatsover.
drstewart•41 minutes ago
*For now
greenavocado•about 2 hours ago
The article has failed to prove that anybody has taken the bait and left.

> For the researcher, the qualities must, from an international perspective, far exceed what is customary within the international peer group. The institution receives a maximum of €1 million per researcher for the next five years.

Let's be generous and assume you are one of the chosen ones. Your institution will take 20% off the top leaving with you 1millionĂ—.80/5 or 160k EUR per year.

After income taxes, your take home pay is €90,868.00 or $103k USD. Not bad for the average man, but not good for a top researcher like they want.

EUR 160k works out to about $182,640. For that level of income in a top tier institution in a state with an income tax like Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, MD you would take home $121,565, or 15% more.

https://thetax.nl/?income=160000&startFrom=Year&selectedYear...

Cthulhu_•about 2 hours ago
This assumes the 1 million is all they get or can use to pay them with. The 1 million is a subsidy, not their salary.

Besides, 90K after taxes is upper middle class. 160K / year is 13K / month which is nearly twice the average income of the richest country in Europe (Switzerland) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_...), or top 0.1% according to https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/how-rich-am-i.

And that's just salary based on that number, it doesn't include other income sources.

zipy124•about 2 hours ago
Academic pay is standardised in many EU countries. For example in the UK you can look up union rates of pay. At UCL (I'm still currently affiliated as I finish my PhD) the pay for a professor starts at ÂŁ82,157 and goes up to a minimum of ÂŁ139,882 for the top band. There is an additional ÂŁ4,678 on top as a London allowance. This roughly lines up with your figure per year, so seems reasonable as an allocation of cost.

Also there are usually very very generous pension schemes here, so total pay is actually quite a lot higher than stated. In addition there is very generous holiday allowance, 41 days at UCL for instance, since you get extra holidays when the university is closed over certain holiday days.

MITSardine•about 1 hour ago
From the article, it sounds more like these funds are the research budget (what you pay other people with). This is quite attractive, students are typically < 200k / PhD, so you can fund quite a few theses with this right off the bat. Basically max out the lab for the grant duration.

I don't know what their salaries would be exactly. This is probably most dependent on where they land, as salaries are very often standardized in Europe. There's usually salary grids per institution dependent on seniority with some milestones being merit-based. Quick google search indicates gross salaries for Professor level (mid/late career) researchers to be around 110-165k€ in NL.

That seems pretty sweet. It's comparable to what US professors make in the hard sciences, as far as I know, with lower CoL than most areas where professors make similar salaries.

And again, salary isn't everything to a researcher. If they can't hire, they're pretty strapped. At this career stage, they're managers, not so much individual contributors. I'd say a maxed out lab for 5 years off the bat is pretty enticing, which also gives time to get up to speed on European funding schemes like ERC grants.

I was a postdoc in the US during Trump's reelection and there were several months where my institution and others had completely cut off scientific staff (such as postdocs, research scientists and engineers) recruitment due to NSF defunding and other threats. Even now, they got taxed on endowment and lost basically 10% budget. This is considerable, and a source of stress for researchers and their current/prospective staff. You can't work properly if you're under the Damocles sword of being laid off / having to lay off your staff.

28304283409234•about 2 hours ago
Assume you are correct, and the Dutch offer a terrible proposition. Yet still they come.
blueaquilae•about 3 hours ago
Experts in flies reproduction leave fro Netherlands.
bergen•about 2 hours ago
The US once was proud of its scientific achievements, now parts of it replaced that with being very proud of their ignorance
drstewart•about 2 hours ago
I thought Europe was proud and independent and completely decoupled from the US, why do you need US scientists suddenly? Hmm...
flexagoon•37 minutes ago
Independence from a country doesn't require excommunication of all citizens of that country
vrganj•about 1 hour ago
That's part of the decoupling. Onshoring as much knowledge as possible.
Herring•about 2 hours ago
America is like a trust fund baby given all the advantages and then the baby goes "fuck it, life is too hard, I am just going to do coke and die early”.
greenavocado•about 2 hours ago
I think you meant to write "boomers."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1trcILsBHkE

mono442•about 3 hours ago
Isn't much of the science work just taking money for doing basically nothing? I don't think that is a loss for the us.
zipy124•about 2 hours ago
No. It is for research that wouldn't be funded by companies, since it is either too risky or has too long of a time-horizon. If all academic research was removed from the world you would notice a vast stagnation in technological progress. This can be confirmed by looking at what technologies have come from this process, and what private research built upon public research.
victorbjorklund•about 3 hours ago
Yea, exactly. You should send all your top scientists to Europe. Great idea to get rid of them. Totally just dragging down your country. Send them to Europe.
pjc50•about 2 hours ago
Hacker News really isn't what it used to be, huh.
karmakurtisaani•about 2 hours ago
Anti-science crowd found their way here as well.
skeledrew•about 2 hours ago
"Science work" is NOT doing nothing. All the modern conveniences we have today came through such work, which usually go for long stretches of time before payoff.
lefra•about 2 hours ago
It's not for doing nothing, it's for fooling around at the edge of knowledge. Sometimes, very useful stuff emerges.
MITSardine•about 1 hour ago
You presumably spent 15 or so years in school to learn things of which many only have very indirect applications, and at most a small minority directly applied to your career.

Should we similarly get rid of mandatory education? Most of it is useless after all.

estearum•about 2 hours ago
For real. How much more do we need to spend to learn that plants crave Brawndo?