> There are still big inefficiencies for those who have capital to discover good scientists / engineers. Lots of them are unknown.

The way it works in academia is that scientists compete with each other for the limited capital ( grant funding and jobs ). Not the other way around.

> But if there are top ones famous it will bring more people to study those fields

Is the problem lack of talent in these fields or the narrow allocation of capital?

Is it really true that Noam is the only person in the world that could have done what he did or where their in fact lots of people who would have succeed given the same opportunities?

That's not to devalue what they did or the impact - and I'm all for recognising the contributions of scientists to society - but the reality is, for the most part, talent competes for capital rather than the other way around.

I'd also point out that I suspect the high profile appointments of people like Noam and John to OpenAI and Anthropic is as much to do with adding star quality to the IPO as much bringing in talent ( and that's not to diminish their talent ).