[rawgabbit]

While that may be true today, in the research sciences — there should be some kind of middle ground.

Thomas Edison may have been a giant of self promotion. But I would argue Nikola Tesla invented as much or more foundationally important technology we use today. I would argue Tesla like Kariko will never be a wiz at self promotion. But a domain expert should have spotted them early on. I mean isn’t that the job of people who dole out tax payer money for research?

UPDATE. I mixed up Edison and Tesla. Tesla was the champion self promoter.

[fsh]

I think you got this backwards. Tesla made a few important inventions early on and then spent the rest of his life showing off big sparks and scamming investors. Edison's labs were far more influential.

[rawgabbit]

Sorry I did get it backwards.

[seanr88]

but the people you have to convince are the people who are doling out tax payer money for research. By definition they don't know your fabulous discovery only you know that. So you need to convince someone else that the idea you have is worth investigating and they should give you money to do it. So the people who are best at convincing other people are the people who get the grants and who get to do the research.

Even once you have discovered something convincing other people that what you have discovered is worthwhile is not easy, as this article shows.

Being a good fundraiser is more important than technical skill in both research/academia and also in startups.

[rawgabbit]

I don't disagree this is the reality. What I am trying to say, is that I hope the people who dole out taxpayer funds can spot people like Dr. Karikó and support them.

Let me try a sports analogy. In American football, each team takes turns (rounds) to draft new players. There are college players who are already famous, had fantastic careers at the college level, and all the scouting agencies said they are can't miss. Then there are college players who played for unknown schools and the scouts don't even have a grade for them. As a result, teams dedicate the first three rounds drafting the players everyone says are can't miss (the good fundraiser in the Academic world). However, the great teams are the ones who can find the hidden gems and draft unknowns in later rounds because they can see the talent (the hypothetical talent scout who spotted the potential of messenger RNA research 20 years ago).

[seanr88]

there is more to the analogy too. Once you have convinced a large player that your offering is important and have raised money successfully, everything gets a lot easier. Have a big grant and work at a top University attracting more money is a hell of a lot easier. Get into YC, guess what raising your Series A just increased in probability by about 20X.