Humanity Relies on Two Kinds of Science — But Only One Gets the Big Bucks
For our future's sake, let's demand government funding for 'little science', says Hertz fellow Avideh Zakhor.
Avideh Zakhor, PhD, is a professor of electrical engineering and computer science at the University of California at Berkeley (Berkeley), and CEO/founder of Indoor Reality, a company whose hardware and data processing pipeline allow for rapid 3D mapping and positioning of interior spaces one step at a time. Indoor Reality is her third startup. Previously, Google in 2007 and Mentor Graphics in 1998 successfully acquired two previous startups: Urban Scan, Inc. and Signamask, OPC Technology, respectively. She has 35+ years experience in electrical engineering and holds the Qualcomm chair in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences (EECS) at Berkeley where she joined the faculty in 1988.
Zakhor is the recipient of numerous awards underscoring both her academic and professional career: the General Motors Scholarship, from 1982-3; Henry Ford Engineering Award, in 1983; the Presidential Young Investigator (PYI) award, in 1990; the Analog Devices Junior Faculty Development Award, from 1990-1995; the Office of Naval Research Young Investigator Award, in 1992; the IEEE Signal Processing Society Transactions Young Paper Award (with S. Hein), in 1997; the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society Video Technology Transactions Best Paper Award (with D. Taubman), 1997; the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society Video Technology Transactions Best Paper Award (with R. Neff), 1999; the International Conference on Image Processing Best Paper Award (with R. Neff), 1999; and the Packet Video Workshop best paper award (with T. Ngyuen), in 2002.
In 1983, Zakhor received her BSc from the California Institute of Technology. In 1987, with her Fannie and John Hertz Foundation Fellowship award, she received her PhD in electrical engineering and computer science from MIT.
Avideh Zakhor: They call it "Little Science versus Big Science." So the trend in big science is now, "Okay, wow. We’re going to have a mega-center of $50 million a year going to University of X, and a hundred scientists are all going to be working on this one gigantic project." And examples of those are particle physics experiments where you need a huge amount of capital.
The trend in government funding is more towards more and more big science, and little science is kind of getting ignored.
But small science is, you know, individual investigators or scientists thinking about an idea that is very risky. You still don’t know whether it warrants $50 million worth of investment in terms of further scientific inquiry, but a little bit of money could go a long way.
When I visited Capitol Hill I didn’t feel that there was a lot of scientific ignorance going on but more like political ideology as to how government funding and where government funding should be applied.
So, for example, when I described the project that we were working on at the time at UC Berkeley that was being commercialized by the Department of Energy into a "real" company, some of the people that we met in Capitol Hill thought that government should not be in the business of funding companies to make products. They thought that venture capitalists should. And my response to that was, "Well, if you visit run-of-the-mill Sandhill Road venture capitalists in the Bay area, they’re mostly interested in social media kind of companies: 'Who’s going to beat Facebook? Who’s going to be the next Twitter? Who’s going to be the next Linked In? Or who’s going to be the next Google,' which has a huge advertising revenue."
And so there’s two things there: One is, smaller projects that have bigger impact and societal impact kind of get ignored. Also, niche technologies that we can build on for future things will not thrive; they will go away. I mean a lot of the things that we’re reaping the benefit of today are because of the basic scientific research that we funded in the 60s and the 70s and the 80s. So if they stop doing that kind of funding by the government, after a while we just won’t have anything to build on top of. We’ll just be advertising to each other and connecting with each other on social media. And that’s it. And that’s not where we want to end up.
So there is a role for government in terms of promoting scientific research for both the sake of scientific research and also for commercializing the scientific research. The government is the only entity that can take a slightly longer point of view in terms of these developments. But I think it’s good for that to happen because sometimes good ideas need a little bit of funding before they can become bigger ideas.
Avideh Zakhor is a Hertz Foundation Fellow and recipient of the prestigious Hertz Foundation Grant for graduate study in the applications of the physical, biological and engineering sciences. Here, she illuminates the difference between 'big science', which draws multiple billions in funding, versus 'little science', which are the seed ideas for our future technology — and the ones that are suffering from science funding cuts. Zakhor insists that Capitol Hill, not Silicon Valley or venture capitalists, must fund little science as the government is in a better position to foster long-term innovation. With the support of the Fannie and John Hertz Foundation, she pursued a PhD in electrical engineering and computer science at MIT.
The Hertz Foundation mission is to provide unique financial and fellowship support to the nation's most remarkable PhD students in the hard sciences. Hertz Fellowships are among the most prestigious in the world, and the foundation has invested over $200 million in Hertz Fellows since 1963 (present value) and supported over 1,100 brilliant and creative young scientists, who have gone on to become Nobel laureates, high-ranking military personnel, astronauts, inventors, Silicon Valley leaders, and tenured university professors. For more information, visit hertzfoundation.org.
"Having a high level of patience often isn't something that comes naturally; instead, it is something that improves over time"
Here's why you might eat greenhouse gases in the future.
- The company's protein powder, "Solein," is similar in form and taste to wheat flour.
- Based on a concept developed by NASA, the product has wide potential as a carbon-neutral source of protein.
- The man-made "meat" industry just got even more interesting.
When it comes to sniffing out whether a source is credible or not, even journalists can sometimes take the wrong approach.
- We all think that we're competent consumers of news media, but the research shows that even journalists struggle with identifying fact from fiction.
- When judging whether a piece of media is true or not, most of us focus too much on the source itself. Knowledge has a context, and it's important to look at that context when trying to validate a source.
- The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.