Contrary to Mathai Joseph and Andrew Robinson's implication, there are many joys associated with doing science in India (Nature 508, 36–38; 2014).

For example, as a theoretical physicist, I am free to pursue curiosity-driven science, I spend little time writing grant proposals and I do not have to raise money to fund my group members. This fills my foreign colleagues with envy. I suspect that these colleagues, many of whom have made productive scientific visits to India, would rank Indian science well above 166th in the world on a different scale of research quality.

I also disagree that we need “non-resident Indians” to partially staff an “empowered funding agency”: India already has one of the world's largest scientific workforces. To me, this proposal smacks of colonialism, albeit in a new form, perhaps inspired by department closures and tenure abolitions in many Western universities.

Finally, I dislike your portrayal of the Taj Mahal wrapped in red tape to convey the call to 'Free Indian science'. Thirty years ago a Nature cover also featured a Taj Mahal postcard image. That seemed inappropriate to me, even as an undergraduate, for a serious discussion of science in India (see Nature 308, 581–600; 1984). I am now a professor and Indian science has arrived, along with an era of cultural sensitivity — but the iconography remains unchanged.