5 ms·

Right a moonshot is spectacular, a triumph of PR, a source of wonder and ultimately a really stupid and unbelievably wasteful way to spend a vast fortune. Moons

by harry8 10y ago

Right a moonshot is spectacular, a triumph of PR, a source of wonder and ultimately a really stupid and unbelievably wasteful way to spend a vast fortune. Moonshot really should be the byword of how /not/ to do science funding. Likewise anything beginning "war on..." The war on cancer is going about as well as the war on drugs. Progress is made elsewhere. Moonshot odds weren't particularly long given the resourcing and desire and this makes it no less impressive as a feat of engineerning and resourcing. And no more sensible.

Bartweiss 10y ago
I'm not convinced this is a general principle like "war on..." Moonshots are intrinsically unlikely, and I suppose we shouldn't expect lots of ancillary benefits (if you get those, it's "fundamental research" instead of a moonshot). But I don't think there's any requirement that moonshots be heavily financed, or otherwise carry net-negative expectation. They may not be the best social expenditure of funds, but those expenditures (typically attacking acute poverty) aren't realistically competing with moonshots for funding. Throwing a trickle of funding at long-odds projects seems like a worthwhile idea - I'll bet there are 100 different large-upside projects out there with a 1% chance of success.
- taneq 10y ago
  Now that you mention it, I think the term 'moonshot' does imply the expectation of some kind of spin-offs being discovered along the way. After all, the original moon missions produced a whole range of useful inventions. I agree that it shouldn't be a pejorative term. The bigger a company is, the closer to basic research they can afford to go in order to create new products and markets. Alphabet is one of the biggest so you'd expect them to be doing pretty much everything down to nuclear physics.
  - Bartweiss 10y ago
    > Alphabet is one of the biggest so you'd expect them to be doing pretty much everything down to nuclear physics. I've always had the sense that they operate on a strategy of "if it's technological and important, we should be doing it". Self-driving cars and longevity enhancement aren't terribly natural markets for Google, but any successes will be worth a fortune. It seems like "don't miss anything" is the basic plan.

by harry8 10y ago

Bartweiss 10y ago

I'm not convinced this is a general principle like "war on..." Moonshots are intrinsically unlikely, and I suppose we shouldn't expect lots of ancillary benefits (if you get those, it's "fundamental research" instead of a moonshot). But I don't think there's any requirement that moonshots be heavily financed, or otherwise carry net-negative expectation. They may not be the best social expenditure of funds, but those expenditures (typically attacking acute poverty) aren't realistically competing with moonshots for funding. Throwing a trickle of funding at long-odds projects seems like a worthwhile idea - I'll bet there are 100 different large-upside projects out there with a 1% chance of success.

taneq 10y ago
Now that you mention it, I think the term 'moonshot' does imply the expectation of some kind of spin-offs being discovered along the way. After all, the original moon missions produced a whole range of useful inventions. I agree that it shouldn't be a pejorative term. The bigger a company is, the closer to basic research they can afford to go in order to create new products and markets. Alphabet is one of the biggest so you'd expect them to be doing pretty much everything down to nuclear physics.
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  > Alphabet is one of the biggest so you'd expect them to be doing pretty much everything down to nuclear physics. I've always had the sense that they operate on a strategy of "if it's technological and important, we should be doing it". Self-driving cars and longevity enhancement aren't terribly natural markets for Google, but any successes will be worth a fortune. It seems like "don't miss anything" is the basic plan.