Top researchers leave USA for the Netherlands (in Dutch)

143 pointsposted 3 hours ago
by 28304283409234

102 Comments

jesdo

2 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_

an hour ago

It'll be on top of any other grants and funding available for research though.

doctorwho42

24 minutes 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

19 minutes 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.

doctorwho42

6 minutes ago

Are you sure about that? Most people miss the fact that a sizeable % of our military budget is slated for research grants/funding.

I'm a physicist in academia, and the amount of money we have gotten from DoD branches for things that have no immediate military applications is like 40-60% of our budget YoY. Like for straight fundamental physics research.

Most scientists I know who have gone to Europe have had to go into the private sector. And the famous ones I work with have gotten like blank check $10M offers from max planck and directorships with guaranteed $1m/yr funding, and still turned them down.

goldenarm

2 hours ago

The US is accidentally conducting Operation Paperclip but in reverse. Who will benefit the most from it, China or Europe ?

est31

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).

jasonhong

an hour 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

dzonga

an hour 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

41 minutes 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.

fakedang

23 minutes ago

I doubt many of the researchers migrating even want Chinese citizenship and the chains that come along with it, so why do most people (presumably Americans) keep harping on and on about it?

Once you're invited by the CCP for your exceptional research background, you're literally given an open chequebook for both your personal compensation and your future research endeavors. You're allowed to take your family along with you too, and the language barrier doesn't translate in the professional setting. Racism is a non-issue since I doubt these researchers will even be interacting with elements of that segment of Chinese Han society, unless they choose to.

Levitz

8 minutes ago

>I doubt many of the researchers migrating even want Chinese citizenship and the chains that come along with it, so why do most people (presumably Americans) keep harping on and on about it?

Because it's an important matter regarding immigration. If you want to live in a country, you might want to actually be a citizen of that country. Does that need explaining?

>Once you're invited by the CCP for your exceptional research background, you're literally given an open chequebook for both your personal compensation and your future research endeavors.

None of which is related to immigration.

>You're allowed to take your family along with you too, and the language barrier doesn't translate in the professional setting. >Racism is a non-issue since I doubt these researchers will even be interacting with elements of that segment of Chinese Han society, unless they choose to.

Are you seriously suggesting that people can literally just not engage at all with the society they live in?

This just reads like deeply, deeply delusional reasoning attempting to paint China as a good alternative.

tasuki

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_

an hour 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

an hour ago

In total, China has roughly the same amount of immigrants as Ireland.

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

coldtea

an hour ago

The amount of skilled immigrants, researchers and engineers, matters for this comparison.

Not just the total amount including random people arriving at the coast.

John23832

an hour ago

No, total immigration matters. Human progress is always subject to the law large numbers.

Skilled polish engineers don't want to be the only polish person in the entire country. They want food, culture, community that reminds them of home. Even as they assimilate. That's why the American melting pot works well. It encourages enclaves that touch one another.

China is the opposite of that. You are hard hammered into the Han-ness, immediately. The language, the writing (which is a HUGE hurdle), the food, the way of life.

losvedir

an hour ago

> American melting pot

For what it's worth, this is the terminology I learned in school decades ago, but I don't think it's preferred anymore. My daughter has a book that calls it a "salad" instead (mixed but retaining their respective properties). I'm probably just old and crotchety but I like that way less.

dataflow

an hour ago

> Even as they assimilate. That's why the American melting pot works well.

I feel like a lot of Americans disagree on these nowadays though, no? Source: just look at recent campaigns and elections.

kevin_thibedeau

20 minutes ago

A large number of those people are only a few generations removed from immigrant ancestors.

John23832

an hour ago

People can feel how they want to feel, campaigns are run on feelings and not facts. Just because Trump says Haitians are eating cats and dogs doesn't make it true.

The Mormons of Utah, the Cajun/French of Louisiana, the Norwegians in the Dakotas, the Scotch Irish of everywhere, and the Amish are all (non-brown) examples of enclaves existing in the US. Nobody says that they are not assimilating well. We let them live their lives because personal liberty used to be a thing here.

Cthulhu_

an hour ago

This is a hugely loaded statement, but that aside, China is not open to immigrants, that was the original thesis and that hasn't been disproven yet.

est31

an hour 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.

karagenit

21 minutes ago

Tangent, but I’m really curious what country you’re from that uses the endonym for Göteborg but then also spells the capital of Denmark like Kopenhagen?

tremon

2 minutes ago

I'm pretty certain all languages do that. It's fairly common to bastardize/assimilate the names of important cities and/or trade hubs into the local language, but leave smaller names unchanged. That's why it's Milano/Milan, Venezia/Venice but Cagliari doesn't have an americanized name; that's why it's Moskva/Moscow but still Irkutsk, etc.

Zigurd

32 minutes 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

an hour 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

16 minutes ago

That's 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.

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 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.

gf000

10 minutes 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.

pjerem

37 minutes 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.

weberer

9 minutes ago

>It's not hard to install AC in Europe

Its orders of magnitude harder. When I lived in the USA, I could just pick up a $200 window unit and have it installed within minutes. Every single person had air conditioning. Now I live in Finland where the windows are the worst designed windows I've ever seen. They are thin, tall windows that open vertically on hinges like doors. So rain gets in, and its impossible to install a window AC or even a box fan. You're forced to either install a mini split ($1000+) or central air. And neither options are available for renters. Really, the #1 priority should be trying to bring American style sliding windows to Europe. Then everything else can fall into place downstream of that.

VWWHFSfQ

an hour 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

an hour 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.

pjerem

29 minutes ago

If you measure economical performance with PIB per capita, yeah, for sure, US has a better economy.

If you measure with anything else useful like (healthy) life expectancy or happiness level, state of the democracy, etc... like if you think the the economy must serve the people and not the other way, I'd say Europe is way more successful despite the real issues.

Actually, I'm baffled at how US performs poorly for their people given they have abundant energy. Norway and Iceland also have abundant energy and their people are seeing the benefits.

fhe

18 minutes 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.

usrusr

an hour ago

Not sure if accidentally is the correct term, given the anti-intellectual platform

amarant

2 hours ago

Probably Europe. Seems more attractive for researchers. China is probably too different to be attractive for most Americans.

em500

2 hours ago

It's not too different for ethnic Chinese researchers, of which there are a lot in American STEM departments.

Cthulhu_

an hour 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.

em500

26 minutes ago

I think you're missing my point. China does not need to or aim to attract any researcher from anywhere. Just attracting top tier ethnic Chinese researchers and technical talent from the US is already a big unequivocal win for them. That talent pool is big: any US Math/Physics Olympiad team of the past 10-20 years is >2/3rds ethnically Chinese. And for them, Europe is not necessarily a more attractive destination than China.

skeledrew

an hour 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

2 hours ago

Even if not a single researcher goes from the US to China, it may still benefit them

bergen

an hour ago

Is it an accident though? This seems very deliberate

goldenarm

an hour ago

Maybe the current administration underestimates the impact of public research, and thinks Silicon Valley appeared out of nowhere.

Dumblydorr

an hour 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.

cdash

2 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

an hour 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_

an hour 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

an hour 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

RandomLensman

29 minutes ago

The laser and optics for the EUV light source are from the US?

Forgeties79

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

29 minutes ago

That money is for the research, not salary

VWWHFSfQ

an hour ago

> At 1 million euros per head.

Over 5 years...

luma

2 hours ago

This reads more like The Netherlands hopes to bribe US researchers into moving to the Netherlands.

vincnetas

2 hours ago

why do you call paying someone legally a "bribe" ?

ericmay

an hour 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

an hour 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

an hour ago

Sometimes. But bribery is also a crime, so using that word invites comment.

jasonlotito

an hour 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.

wccrawford

an hour ago

I also live in the US. It's uncommon, but is used that way sometimes.

hilariously

41 minutes ago

If you want to use a thing utterly incorrectly sometimes get ready to be met with confused responses.

koiueo

an hour 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_

an hour ago

Our Glorious Leader <-> Their Wicked Despot comic comes to mind.

floatrock

24 minutes ago

right, the proper term is "incentive", "tax break", or "economic development fund"

tgv

an hour ago

Then the US used to bribe our researchers. It's tit-for-tat in this case.

Cthulhu_

an hour ago

I for one am still waiting for US tech companies to bribe me to come work for them.

dwa3592

32 minutes ago

Actually there are many such headlines, just replace the Netherlands with [China, Singapore, Australia, India].

adam_beck

2 hours ago

Top researchers in what?

pastor_williams

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.

HelloUsername

2 hours ago

derbOac

34 minutes 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."

lifestyleguru

34 minutes 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.

blastonico

36 minutes ago

Who are those "top" researchers? and how many?

greenavocado

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 1million×.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_

an hour 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

an hour 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 £82,157 and goes up to a minimum of £139,882 for the top band. There is an additional £4,678 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

19 minutes 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

2 hours ago

Assume you are correct, and the Dutch offer a terrible proposition. Yet still they come.

glimshe

2 hours ago

Great, more homes for sale should help make them more affordable for those who stay.

blueaquilae

2 hours ago

Experts in flies reproduction leave fro Netherlands.

bergen

an hour ago

The US once was proud of its scientific achievements, now parts of it replaced that with being very proud of their ignorance

drstewart

an hour ago

I thought Europe was proud and independent and completely decoupled from the US, why do you need US scientists suddenly? Hmm...

vrganj

24 minutes ago

That's part of the decoupling. Onshoring as much knowledge as possible.

drstewart

an hour ago

Will they be exempt from providing ID to post on the internet or nah?

michalpleban

an hour ago

I can post on the Internet whatever I want without providing any ID whatsover.

mono442

2 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

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

2 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.

MITSardine

17 minutes 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.

pjc50

2 hours ago

Hacker News really isn't what it used to be, huh.

lefra

2 hours ago

It's not for doing nothing, it's for fooling around at the edge of knowledge. Sometimes, very useful stuff emerges.

estearum

an hour ago

For real. How much more do we need to spend to learn that plants crave Brawndo?

skeledrew

an hour 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.