> Why do people think that this has been successful for DARPA? DARPA has spent billions on all kinds of ideas that don't work, including prize competitions. So

> Why do people think that this has been successful for DARPA? DARPA has spent billions on all kinds of ideas that don't work, including prize competitions. Some people regard the DARPA prizes as successful because, in some cases, the technology to win the prize was developed. > DARPA is also known (notoriously, one could say) for operating a good-old-boys system, where you have to butter up the DARPA program managers to get any funding. Can you explain this a bit more in the context of the prize program? It looks like a criticism of their grant program, but you follow it with: > So no, I don't agree that prizes have been successful for DARPA.