Hm. One can do awesome CS research without having to make tons of money. One can also make money with other people’s/universities’/countries’ CS research while doing zero CS research in-house.
Research and money making are pretty much orthogonal.
With research I refer to fundamental CS research, not how to squeeze 0.00053% more out of imagenet or making photos of young people look old, or solving problems of logistics in driver scheduling.
Okay, let me rephrase this: The current strategy is great for individual researchers - when they become successfull they can get a great $400k/year job in the US. It sucks for the europeans who paid for them to get there though.
Funny enough, the way Germany’s Max-Planck Society is successful in hiring top US scientists not through outrageous salaries, but by offering them guaranteed, generous research budget in perpetuity.
Not all researchers care about getting rich personally.
No need to get personal. All I’m saying is that research success is not well measured by the amount of money it reels in. That doesn’t mean scientists should not make money.
It just means the one has little to do with the other. Orthogonal.
I know excellent scientists who are rich and equally excellent ones who are poor. I also know some intellectually less well endowed folks who are crazy rich.
Money and research success have little to do with each other. All I’m saying.
With research I refer to fundamental CS research, not how to squeeze 0.00053% more out of imagenet or making photos of young people look old, or solving problems of logistics in driver scheduling.