How is government funded science and research responsible for

They'll throw infinite amounts of money at anything that might have military value.

The government just hires a lot of scientists and engineers. There are plenty of private sector discoveries, but it's no surprise that there are so many government-funded ones when they fund like 1/3rd of the research that is done. It builds the economy and helps maintains our state's global position both militarily and socially; it's a no-brainer.

Businesses are risk averse. Shareholders could give a fuck about anything other than profits
Deprivatize everything

>>9159301
Government research does not have the goal of entertaining people.

>>9159388
Ask Umbrella Corp about Rain Corp...

Cirporations only care for profit not for progress. If they make technological innovations its because it would be profitable

>>9159845
This. Basically the problem that op is pointing is the fault of normies. Just look at the incredible amount of useless garbage that has been invented in the last decades.

>>9159301
R&D is expensive and risky, that's why public research is what yields most of the technology we use

If you knew anything about technology, you'd know that private enterprise is THE driving force behind any tech.
The first transistors, internet etc, have barely been usable. Yes the ideas came from academic people (who are usually smart and so take any gibs they can get), but ideas are meaningless if not put into a working product.

See the evolution of the smartphone, or computers, or cars. All private enterprise.

>>9159864
great thread up until this post

Military spinoffs. War is the father of all things.

>>9159301
yes

>>9159864
This used to hold true until after WW2. I think the competition between Tesla and Edison over ac and dc is the prime example of free market enterprise promoting technological advances. But ever since 1945, and more noticeably, since the end of the Cold War, the government has played a larger role in the development of new technologies, simply because most important day to day technologies were already widely used. Few people need electromagnetic railguns for an everyday use, and few companies can afford to conduct such large scale research. Of course, there are many companies that still contribute to the development of new technologies. Take Tesla or IBM for example. In the end, contribution to tech has always come from both government and free enterprise, it's just that how much each contributed varied through time.

>>9159328
This. Primary research is both expensive and unprofitable. Companies just take publicly funded research (universities) and build upon it because it's easier and cheaper

>>9159301
Private firms and patents were involved in everything you mentioned.

Also the government generally invests in big showy projects, you don't see all the technical work that goes on in the background which would bore the general public and which only specialized businesses and investors are willing to put money into.

>>9159328
>>9160345
so why do corporations pour billions into R&D

if the government wants to pour billions into researching something it would be uneconomical for businesses to do it, they invest in research elsewhere

>>9159301
what a myopic post

>>9159312
you should be using the past tense there.