Whilst worthy in themselves, applications shouldn't be the only way to drive basic research.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Most decisions don't require extensive research.
If you don't invest in basic research at some stage you start losing the basis of applied research.
I don't think technology is viable unless the person applying it has something to say.
I decry the current tendency to seek patents on algorithms. There are better ways to earn a living than to prevent other people from making use of one's contributions to computer science.
There's a big tendency to gravitate toward a closed and proprietary approach too easily.
It's important to me that no one can say I'm not pumping out high-level research.
Lots of people working in cryptography have no deep concern with real application issues. They are trying to discover things clever enough to write papers about.
Research! A mere excuse for idleness; it has never achieved, and will never achieve any results of the slightest value.
As history has shown, pure science research ultimately ends up applying to something. We just don't know it at the time.
Basic research is very useful, but it should be more geared toward application than it was before.