Harvard tell Trump to pound sand

Anonymous
Bet Trump kidnaps Alan Garber and deports him to Salvador.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Bet Trump kidnaps Alan Garber and deports him to Salvador.


Nothing would surprise me at this point.
Anonymous
Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?


WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Good. It will save us tax dollars.


Probably not. The US government will no longer get royalty free IP from the research they funded. Now they will have to license it on commercial terms.


Does Harvard even have an IP portfolio? They probably do mostly policy research.


7722 patents across all sorts of stuff.

https://www.freepatentsonline.com/school/Harvard-University/portfolio-p4.html


That is a fraction of an ordinary public university: https://www.freepatentsonline.com/result.html?sort=relevance&srch=top&query_txt=University+of+Missouri&submit=&patents_us=on

People don't realize Harvard is about business, law, oh yeah maybe medicine, but not much in medicine.




True. But as this sniping goes on whose side do you think MIT will join? They get 1.6 billion . . . and have a few more patents than Univ. of Missouri (is that you Josh?)


Yes, but MIT makes things that are useful, Harvard only does policy research. If Harvard isn't going to produce any research that is usefult to this administration, why should we fund it?

Harvard only does policy research? What kind of moronic universe do MAGAs inhabit?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Good. It will save us tax dollars.


agree, I never realized how much money is given to Ivy League schools , elite schools that should never be subsidized by taxpayers

how the elites justify this is beyond me.


Hmm. How about training researchers, producing research, and educating some of the people who will eventually become competent and even groundbreaking in their fields — in ways that contribute to the health, safety, and well-being of all of us. Sounds good to me! It’s a great use of my particular tax dollars.

I laughed (darkly) when I heard that Trump fired members of the team who developed treatments that likely saved his life when he got COVID. If there’s a next time, I hope he’s alert enough to understand it when he’s told: “Well, we were working on that Sir, but you and DOGE closed that unit down. The world’s foremost medical team working on what you’ve got is gone. Here’s an aspirin though.”

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?


You are a giant moron....but I'm sure you know.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Good. It will save us tax dollars.


Probably not. The US government will no longer get royalty free IP from the research they funded. Now they will have to license it on commercial terms.


Does Harvard even have an IP portfolio? They probably do mostly policy research.


7722 patents across all sorts of stuff.

https://www.freepatentsonline.com/school/Harvard-University/portfolio-p4.html


That is a fraction of an ordinary public university: https://www.freepatentsonline.com/result.html?sort=relevance&srch=top&query_txt=University+of+Missouri&submit=&patents_us=on

People don't realize Harvard is about business, law, oh yeah maybe medicine, but not much in medicine.




True. But as this sniping goes on whose side do you think MIT will join? They get 1.6 billion . . . and have a few more patents than Univ. of Missouri (is that you Josh?)


Yes, but MIT makes things that are useful, Harvard only does policy research. If Harvard isn't going to produce any research that is usefult to this administration, why should we fund it?

Harvard only does policy research? What kind of moronic universe do MAGAs inhabit?


I'm pretty sure in scientific circles Harvard doesn't mean anything and won't be missed. What did you study at Harvard, engineering? Hahaha

This is what chatGPT had to say about why Harvard has so many fewer patents:

Focus on Basic Research
Harvard emphasizes fundamental science — research aimed at understanding how things work, rather than immediately creating marketable technologies. This kind of work often leads to papers and discoveries rather than patents.

Different Institutional Missions
Public universities like the University of California system, University of Michigan, or University of Texas often have large engineering schools and agriculture/biotech programs that are historically more tied to applied research and commercialization. These schools also have strong partnerships with industry and state initiatives that incentivize patenting.

Size and Breadth
Schools like UC Berkeley or Texas A&M have massive engineering and agriculture departments (often larger than Harvard’s entire science faculty) and more infrastructure specifically aimed at technology transfer and commercialization.

Culture and Incentives
Some academic environments encourage publishing over patenting. Harvard has stepped up its Office of Technology Development in recent years, but the culture still leans more toward scholarly impact than commercial output.

Harvard vs. MIT
Just across the river, MIT is an engineering and applied science beast, and it cranks out patents like crazy. If you're comparing institutions in terms of innovation-to-product pipeline, MIT usually dwarfs Harvard, even though both schools collaborate on a lot of research.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Good. It will save us tax dollars.


Yes, why do we even sponsor research at Harvard? Let's just say science isn't their strong point anyway. No one goes to Harvard to get a science degree. No one.


Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard Medical School, Harvard School of engineering.

You only thought of undergraduate didn’t you. Anyway they have plenty of engineering, science and math bachelors
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Is there a list of institutions that have stood up to him? I can only think of a few, American Bar association, WilmerHale, and now Harvard.


The constortium of what is essentially the Big10 schools (18 plus U-Chicago?) have created a joint defense fund and agreement to fight anything that comes their way, collectively.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:About 70% of the funds related to Harvard were associated with med school / hospitals like Mass General , Dana Farber etc, so research for cancer , diabetes , etc…


I go to Dana Farber for treatment and they always have research studies going on.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Good. It will save us tax dollars.


Probably not. The US government will no longer get royalty free IP from the research they funded. Now they will have to license it on commercial terms.


Does Harvard even have an IP portfolio? They probably do mostly policy research.


7722 patents across all sorts of stuff.

https://www.freepatentsonline.com/school/Harvard-University/portfolio-p4.html


That is a fraction of an ordinary public university: https://www.freepatentsonline.com/result.html?sort=relevance&srch=top&query_txt=University+of+Missouri&submit=&patents_us=on

People don't realize Harvard is about business, law, oh yeah maybe medicine, but not much in medicine.




True. But as this sniping goes on whose side do you think MIT will join? They get 1.6 billion . . . and have a few more patents than Univ. of Missouri (is that you Josh?)


Yes, but MIT makes things that are useful, Harvard only does policy research. If Harvard isn't going to produce any research that is usefult to this administration, why should we fund it?

Harvard only does policy research? What kind of moronic universe do MAGAs inhabit?


I'm pretty sure in scientific circles Harvard doesn't mean anything and won't be missed. What did you study at Harvard, engineering? Hahaha

This is what chatGPT had to say about why Harvard has so many fewer patents:

Focus on Basic Research
Harvard emphasizes fundamental science — research aimed at understanding how things work, rather than immediately creating marketable technologies. This kind of work often leads to papers and discoveries rather than patents.

Different Institutional Missions
Public universities like the University of California system, University of Michigan, or University of Texas often have large engineering schools and agriculture/biotech programs that are historically more tied to applied research and commercialization. These schools also have strong partnerships with industry and state initiatives that incentivize patenting.

Size and Breadth
Schools like UC Berkeley or Texas A&M have massive engineering and agriculture departments (often larger than Harvard’s entire science faculty) and more infrastructure specifically aimed at technology transfer and commercialization.

Culture and Incentives
Some academic environments encourage publishing over patenting. Harvard has stepped up its Office of Technology Development in recent years, but the culture still leans more toward scholarly impact than commercial output.

Harvard vs. MIT
Just across the river, MIT is an engineering and applied science beast, and it cranks out patents like crazy. If you're comparing institutions in terms of innovation-to-product pipeline, MIT usually dwarfs Harvard, even though both schools collaborate on a lot of research.

Is this comedy?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Good. It will save us tax dollars.


Probably not. The US government will no longer get royalty free IP from the research they funded. Now they will have to license it on commercial terms.


You don’t know much about IP enforcement against the US government.
Anonymous
Harvard is not as important as it used to be. There are plenty of public universities that offer a comparable education at 1/4 the price.

Success breeds complacency. Complacency breeds failure. Only the paranoid survive. - Andy Grove.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Harvard is not as important as it used to be. There are plenty of public universities that offer a comparable education at 1/4 the price.

Success breeds complacency. Complacency breeds failure. Only the paranoid survive. - Andy Grove.


Why are we paying for public universities?
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: