Speaking as a researcher, IMO you might be belittling the OP&#x27;s concern. While the YC initiative is noble, it has yet to be tested. I have worked in research and tech startups, and in very many ways the two couldn&#x27;t be more different. Some of the best biotech research comes from incremental and ponderous study of minutiae, not &#x27;ends driven&#x27; processes.<p>From the perspective of a biotech researcher in the US, the funding model here is broken. As a result of funding levels falling for more than a decade, and universities being less willing to invest in individuals without consistent major funding, getting grants has become a very political process.<p>I applaud YC&#x27;s efforts. We need alternatives, but I am not sure that YC is interested in the same kinds of research that the legacy funding system used to support. Science is not sexy. The results can be incredibly sexy, but you never go in looking for those sexy results.<p>EDIT: In addition, it&#x27;s worth considering the difference in the peak talent age of a researcher as compared to a programmer. You can code in your bedroom as a preteen, but it&#x27;s very difficult to get unfettered access to a molecular research laboratory before the age of 22. The best researchers are older, and that changes the equation in important ways.