Comments on: Prize Philanthropy Part II http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/prize-philanthropy-part-ii Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:42:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/comment-page-1#comment-612 Sean Stannard-Stockton Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:22:17 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/09/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/#comment-612 Thanks for the comment Tesla. I agree that figuring out how to jump up the curve is more interesting and useful and getting people to try and achieve far out goals. However, I think that Philanthropy is beset with "major hurdles" and does not have market forces to help. So innovation is of added importance. Thanks for the comment Tesla. I agree that figuring out how to jump up the curve is more interesting and useful and getting people to try and achieve far out goals.

However, I think that Philanthropy is beset with “major hurdles” and does not have market forces to help. So innovation is of added importance.

]]> By: Tesla Falcon http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/comment-page-1#comment-611 Tesla Falcon Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:08:14 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/09/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/#comment-611 Philanthropy for innovation only benefits when there is a major hurdle to overcome, a mindset that needs changing, or an impossible that needs to become possible. This includes the flight across the Atlantic, the 4-minute mile, and the commercialization of outer space. Market forces are more than sufficient for innovation 99% of the time. It's that remaining 1% that we need people who're willing to risk it all: money, reputation, life, etc. to overcome the seemingly impossible technological hurdles as they arrive. This brings us to the topic of timing. Some inventions or prizes are "too advanced" for the people of the day. The defunct Bigelow Space Prize, the Automotive X Prize, etc. are examples of unwelcome philanthropy. We're not ready for a space hotel yet. People chose power and looks over economy for vehicles in America. Google was smart to ask Diamandis who knows the state of technology and what was on the edge of both doable and potentially commercial what the next prize ought to be. Thus they put together a timely prize that addressed the next 1% hurdle. Philanthropy for innovation only benefits when there is a major hurdle to overcome, a mindset that needs changing, or an impossible that needs to become possible. This includes the flight across the Atlantic, the 4-minute mile, and the commercialization of outer space. Market forces are more than sufficient for innovation 99% of the time. It’s that remaining 1% that we need people who’re willing to risk it all: money, reputation, life, etc. to overcome the seemingly impossible technological hurdles as they arrive. This brings us to the topic of timing. Some inventions or prizes are “too advanced” for the people of the day. The defunct Bigelow Space Prize, the Automotive X Prize, etc. are examples of unwelcome philanthropy. We’re not ready for a space hotel yet. People chose power and looks over economy for vehicles in America. Google was smart to ask Diamandis who knows the state of technology and what was on the edge of both doable and potentially commercial what the next prize ought to be. Thus they put together a timely prize that addressed the next 1% hurdle.

]]> By: Suzy http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/comment-page-1#comment-610 Suzy Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:57:42 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/09/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/#comment-610 Thanks Holden. You've succinctly articulated the thought behind my comment. Thanks Holden. You’ve succinctly articulated the thought behind my comment.

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/comment-page-1#comment-609 Sean Stannard-Stockton Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:26:48 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/09/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/#comment-609 Innovation for the sake of innovation is pointless. I agree. Innovation for the sake of innovation is pointless. I agree.

]]> By: Holden http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/comment-page-1#comment-608 Holden Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:13:53 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/10/09/prize-philanthropy-part-ii/#comment-608 The cotton gin wasn't invented because there was money in innovation. It was invented because there was money in cotton. The airplane didn't come about because of demand for a "new" kind of transportation. It came about because of demand for speed. Funding what might work will cause competition to produce the best-sounding idea. Funding what works will cause competition to create the best-working idea. I think it's unnecessary to award "innovation." Better to award results - innovation will follow naturally. The cotton gin wasn’t invented because there was money in innovation. It was invented because there was money in cotton.

The airplane didn’t come about because of demand for a “new” kind of transportation. It came about because of demand for speed.

Funding what might work will cause competition to produce the best-sounding idea. Funding what works will cause competition to create the best-working idea.

I think it’s unnecessary to award “innovation.” Better to award results – innovation will follow naturally.

]]>