This is stupid. Nobody motivated by money is in academia. Academics are motivated by curiosity, but also prestige, vanity and the wish to hire students and collaborators. And on top of human vanity working it's magic, the ideology that everything should be a market and competition is the final form of social organisation, has pervaded academia just as much as everything else.

I agree that the system of publishing papers to gain prestige to gain resources to publish papers was already broken pre AI.

> This is stupid.

Can you please make your substantive points without swipes or calling names? This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Your comment would be fine without that first bit.

You're right that being a scientist is unlikely to result in personal wealth and so that's not the primary drive for those who seek faculty or research positions. However, it's not just curiosity, prestige and vanity either, because a big factor for promotion and tenure is how much grant money you bring in. That money is what keeps the university's lights on and buys the lab equipment and pays the grad students, so it's still money as a primary driver in the background.

just replace "money" with "prestige" and I think the above comment works just fine