Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

"If you want to see big changes, create big rewards for solutions without constraint to how they are accpomplished. So let's see $50 Billion to anybody who can take us to a repeatable $10/kilo to low earth orbit. Or $10 Billion for the first 3D printer able to print an electric car."

Arguably that's what government grants do or should do. Taking 50 billion dollars in tax money and stoking the fire in an area we are interested in WITHOUT THE EXPECTATION OF A MONETARY RETURN is the kind of thing the government can and does do. Of course, some of that 50 billion gets eaten by graft, and that's where the problem a lot of people have with government programs. Although private companies don't seem to have any better levels of control (usually much worse control) over corruption, a lot of people seem to think only 100% success demonstrates "working" government.



view as:

>Of course, some of that 50 billion gets eaten by graft, and that's where the problem a lot of people have with government programs.

That's why prizes are a good way to go. Nothing gets paid out if you don't reach your goal.

>Although private companies don't seem to have any better levels of control (usually much worse control) over corruption, a lot of people seem to think only 100% success demonstrates "working" government.

The difference is private companies are spending money provided as a result of an agreement freely entered into by all parties, while the government is spending money taken from people by force of law. The government should be held to a much higher standard.


The thing about prizes is that negative results are quite significant in real science.

Prizes still generate negative results. It's just that someone else is paying for it.

Legal | privacy