[jayasena]

Private ventures fund hundreds of failed companies for every blockbuster like Google or Facebook.

True. But they do with money of willing investors. Government investments fail with my money, which was not provided voluntarily. The difference is huuuuuuge.

My point was that the value of the blockbuster successes outweigh the numerous failures. The fact that willing private investors embrace a model with similar odds was merely in support of that. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

And personally, I'd be perfectly happy with a model where those who do not wish to subsidize research don't have to do so as long as they don't free-load on the subsequent benefits... if someone can figure out how to make that work for pervasive developments like the internet.

Back on the original topic, it appears the Forbes article overstated the extent of the proposed changes. UF responds: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigman/20...epartment/

[jayasena]

Private ventures fund hundreds of failed companies for every blockbuster like Google or Facebook.

True. But they do with money of willing investors. Government investments fail with my money, which was not provided voluntarily. The difference is huuuuuuge.

My point was that the value of the blockbuster successes outweigh the numerous failures. The fact that willing private investors embrace a model with similar odds was merely in support of that. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

And personally, I'd be perfectly happy with a model where those who do not wish to subsidize research don't have to do so as long as they don't free-load on the subsequent benefits... if someone can figure out how to make that work for pervasive developments like the internet.

Back on the original topic, it appears the Forbes article overstated the extent of the proposed changes. UF responds: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigman/20...epartment/