3 ms·

Do you have any evidence to back this up? Off the top of my head I can think of several dozen large successful projects, everything from the Mars Rover to CERN

by acadien 13y ago

Do you have any evidence to back this up? Off the top of my head I can think of several dozen large successful projects, everything from the Mars Rover to CERN's LHC to the great wall of China and the Pyramids. These were all enormous projects requiring thousands of workers.

ballard 13y ago
For anyone that has worked for a large organization, for- or non-profit, for any amount of time with a budget then it's easier to understand how things actually work. I have seen 9 figure / 7 year internal projects silently scuttled as to not create a "failure", despite delivering nothing. I have seen 6 figure projects surpass 8 figure projects through a combination of talent and leadership. I've seen duplication of systems merely because two depts can't find a way to work together, effectively doubling costs. Depends on the meaning of "success." "Success" of a political project is rarely based on results; all projects are "successful," because the unsuccessful ones disappear. Real success, as in achieving an novel aim, is another matter. Success is great, but at too high of a cost, it may make the results bitter (bodies in the Great Wall, pushing $10 billion total spent on NIF without results). This is where private R&D excels: there's a defined goal, time/cost pressures and usually fewer political constraints. This is why high beta has a higher probability of success AND a lower cost of success (better value/$).
- acadien 13y ago
  There have been hundreds (maybe thousands?) of independently operating research groups at Universities and government labs, working since the 1950's all of them studying fusion. None of them has come as close to attaining controlled self-sustained fusion as the NIF. That is the entire point of large grand projects, they do what small groups aren't capable of. Simply because the NIF hasn't yet attained self-sustained controlled fusion doesn't mean its a failure. What do you think is reasonable price tag for the development of an entirely new form of clean energy?

by acadien 13y ago

ballard 13y ago

For anyone that has worked for a large organization, for- or non-profit, for any amount of time with a budget then it's easier to understand how things actually work. I have seen 9 figure / 7 year internal projects silently scuttled as to not create a "failure", despite delivering nothing. I have seen 6 figure projects surpass 8 figure projects through a combination of talent and leadership. I've seen duplication of systems merely because two depts can't find a way to work together, effectively doubling costs. Depends on the meaning of "success." "Success" of a political project is rarely based on results; all projects are "successful," because the unsuccessful ones disappear. Real success, as in achieving an novel aim, is another matter. Success is great, but at too high of a cost, it may make the results bitter (bodies in the Great Wall, pushing $10 billion total spent on NIF without results). This is where private R&D excels: there's a defined goal, time/cost pressures and usually fewer political constraints. This is why high beta has a higher probability of success AND a lower cost of success (better value/$).

acadien 13y ago
There have been hundreds (maybe thousands?) of independently operating research groups at Universities and government labs, working since the 1950's all of them studying fusion. None of them has come as close to attaining controlled self-sustained fusion as the NIF. That is the entire point of large grand projects, they do what small groups aren't capable of. Simply because the NIF hasn't yet attained self-sustained controlled fusion doesn't mean its a failure. What do you think is reasonable price tag for the development of an entirely new form of clean energy?