When State Grants Disappear: How to Finance Science in the Age of Obscurantists

The state likes to present itself as the “sole savior” of science. Budgetary money seems like a reliable thing, but only until the next lover of “true knowledge” comes to power. And just like that—your field of science is immediately declared an “enemy of the people” and, in the best case, simply stripped of funding.

Remember how Donald Trump, with one stroke of a pen, cut funding for climatology and research in the field of renewable energy? Scientists had spent years accumulating knowledge, writing papers, and relying on promised grants, and then—bam—the funding turned into a pumpkin. Because of “I don’t believe it” and “I don’t like it.” Science isn’t Hollywood: there might not be a sequel if the money suddenly runs out. And scientists are left either to find a sponsor themselves or to sadly wind down their research.

And this is where alternative sources of funding come into play, many of which have already proven their viability time and again throughout history.

1) Since the Renaissance, people of art and science have lived on the support of wealthy patrons. Modern philanthropists, such as Bill Gates, Elon Musk, or even (who would have thought!) Pavel Durov, allocate millions of dollars to education, medical research, artificial intelligence, and even space exploration. Why? Simply because they like it. Or they want humanity to stop being so boring and monotonous. Who knows! In Russia, an example was Dmitry Zimin’s “Dynasty” foundation, which gave a second wind to many talented people until the state suddenly decided it was a “foreign agent.” But the idea itself didn’t die—funds like “Trajectory,” “Evolution,” and other initiatives appeared. In short, even here, science funded by private money is a reality.

2) Don’t laugh—sometimes asking the people for money is much more effective than asking stern uncles from the Ministry of Education. People are happy to support unusual projects, whether it’s the “Mayak” satellite launched by Russian students or gut microbiota research that raised over 350 thousand dollars on Kickstarter. Yes, the gut turned out to be far more charismatic than experts thought. It works simply: you make a vivid presentation, explain to people why it’s important (or at least fun), and the people vote with their wallets.

3) If your research smells even slightly of commercial perspective, it’s worth considering venture capital and business. There are plenty of examples: from Bell Labs and IBM, which gave the world transistors and lasers, to SpaceX, which made private astronautics a reality. Yes, this isn’t “pure science for science’s sake,” but it is business that can give a push to technologies that would otherwise remain as reports on a shelf.

4) Prizes and competitions. Once, entrepreneur Peter Diamandis announced a 10 million dollar prize for whoever first flew into space twice in two weeks on a private ship. In the end, the winner spent nearly 25 million on preparation, but that’s not the point. The competition spawned an entire industry of private space transport.

5) For the truly advanced: DAO and crypto-science. DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) allow people to unite and fund science via blockchain. An example is VitaDAO, which successfully raised millions of dollars for longevity research. Perhaps crypto-enthusiasts will vote for your idea with tokens?

6) Subscription to results: people and companies pay to be the first to get access to your scientific data and discoveries. The more interesting and important your research, the more subscribers. Almost like Netflix, but instead of series—your discoveries.

7) Imagine a prediction market where investors bet on scientific ideas and results. If your project looks convincing, you will receive funding from those who believe in your success and want to profit from an accurate prediction.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

The Publication of “Mechanisms of Freedom”

When I mentioned that the competition is not sleeping, and that an alternative translation of Friedman’s book is already undergoing pre-press preparation, I forgot to provide a link to the fundraiser for its printing. Those who would like to participate in the project, send a donation there.

At the time of this publication, 59,350 out of 80,000 rubles have been collected.


Also, as far as can be judged by David Friedman’s website, he wants to post Russian translations of his poems (most likely including mine), but the link does not work yet.

Crowdfunding. Practice

No sooner had I posted the text about how crowdfunding is the most obvious way to finance the production of public goods in a free market, as an illustration came along.

The St. Petersburg branch of the LPR is renting an office, and to raise funds for its lease, they decided to hold a regular stream. Today at 20:00 Moscow time on the YouTube channel Ancap-podcast the show “Brewing Moonshine” will take place, during which the host intends to drink a glass of moonshine for every 1000 rubles in donations. I don’t know if they’ll be distilling it on the spot or pouring ready-made, but it could turn out to be amusing.

I was offered 300 rubles to post this announcement, and I decided to briefly deviate from my rules, according to which a resource review should not stand alone, but be accompanied by my answer to a donation-backed question. Today we are holding the funeral without the deceased.

I think I’ll drop by to listen to the stream too, although I intend to drink martini with tonic while doing so, if you’ll excuse me.

https://youtu.be/ESZmGW7DKhM

Kickstarter for public goods

Bitark’s Column

In discussions between libertarians and statists, the question “Who will build the roads under ancap?” comes up almost every time. There are many possible answers to this, but I have not encountered a beautiful, universal solution for the problem of providing public goods in a stateless society. At least not until yesterday, when in a stream by the “Antigovernment” community, Savva Shanaev introduced an idea by Alex Tabarrok that is little known in Russia: “Dominant Assurance Contracts”.

Public goods include a wide variety of benefits that anyone can use regardless of whether they paid for them or not — roads, bridges, street lighting, storm sewers, lighthouses, protective dams, herd immunity resulting from universal vaccination, law enforcement, strategic deterrence, waste recycling, sewage treatment, public parks, and much more. The main problem with their provision is the free-rider effect. When it is impossible to charge for the use of public goods, no one will simply pay for them, viewing them as a “given” or hoping that someone else will pay.

The stationary bandit (the state) constantly exploits this to prove its necessity. State propaganda claims that only the state can build roads and bridges, and therefore a territorial monopoly and taxation are needed to fund them.

However, there is a simple and clear way to provide public goods in a completely free market. It has already been implemented on the well-known platform Kickstarter, and without the state, it will be used far more often than it is now. The principle of its operation is roughly as follows.

For example, residents of a neighborhood are tired of breaking their legs and damaging their cars in potholes on the road. An activist contacts a road paving company and gets an estimate. Then, they go to a crowdfunding platform and create a fundraising campaign, specifying the required amount and the deadline for collection. They send letters to the neighborhood residents asking for any possible assistance in funding the road repair and provide a link to the crowdfunding campaign. Anyone can go there and see how much money has been contributed so far, how much more is needed, and when the collection ends. If the required amount is collected by the deadline, the campaign is considered successful, and the road repair company receives the order. If the full amount cannot be collected by the specified date, the money is returned in full to the residents. It is their choice; it means they truly do not need the road repair, and it is absolutely unethical to rob the population of the entire country through taxes to repair their road. Those who cannot stand living without a road move to neighborhoods with a more demanding population, and over time, a natural separation occurs based on the level of demand for infrastructure quality.

Everything is fine, people are satisfied