To disrupt scientific research you need to change the way that science is funded. Science is not for-profit, unlike the disrupted industries mentioned here. If you have to show how determining how a flagella works is going to produce revenue, then you are going to stifle science in another way.
Good science is slow, deliberate, and motivated by open-ended questions and discovery, not by end points.
We need to fund the process of science, and make sure that the knowledge gained is shared publicly. No other disruption is necessary.
Science is also not not-for-profit. Plenty of for-profit businesses do research, and publish in scientific journals. Some research fields (drug development comes first to mind) have a very large industry presence.
Good science is slow, deliberate, and motivated by open-ended questions and discovery, not by end points.
We need to fund the process of science, and make sure that the knowledge gained is shared publicly. No other disruption is necessary.