X prizes and X Programs

View 712 Monday, February 06, 2012

WHAT IS AN X PROGRAM 

It is important to understand that X projects were wildly successful, and it is their success that caused them to end. The official US policy in the era of the X Projects was arms control. Arms control sought to limit the arms race and that included limiting advances in military technology. X Projects generated lots of new military technologies: far too many for the arms control strategists. Whenther or not that was a good idea in the Cold War – I hated it, of course – it is certainly NOT a good idea now. X Projects generate new technologies.

All this is discussed in The Strategy of Technology. See below.

The papers are full of articles about how independent voters are sick of Republicans calling each other names.

Political managers know that independent voters generally turn out to vote against, not for, candidates and issues.

Reagan understood all this, thus the Eleventh Commandment. It’s simple logic, but alas, that isn’t taught in today’s public schools, where the claim may be that they teach kids how to think, but the reality is more that the teachers defend an agenda chosen by “experts”, who are far more likely to insist on fashionable intellectual trends rather than the tools of thought.

I keep hearing reports of Israeli preparatory activity, as if the IDF is getting ready for something big. I do not believe Israel can take out the Iranian nuclear capability by itself. There’s no sure way to do that with air strikes. The operation will require brigade sized ground operations. Israel has a parachute brigade and has recently practiced a brigade sized training operation, but I doubt that Israel has the capability of extracting that force once the mission is completed. Of course if the mission is critical enough that may not be the primary decision factor.

My head isn’t working well. I have a lot of great mail. I’m going to spend some time answering it. Here’s one thing to think about while I am working on it.

Jerry

Do X-prizes make a difference? Try this one – the iPhone doc may detect cancer, diabetes and other illness:

iPhone doc will detect cancer, diabetes –

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01/31/touch_screen_diagnosis/print.html

“A drop of blood or saliva can be analysed using an ordinary touch screen – and once boffins perfect the identification of biological molecules, then diagnosis by iPhone isn’t far off. The work is being done in South Korea, where researchers at the Advanced Institute of Science and Technology have been spitting and bleeding onto capacitive touch screens to see what details they can extract from the samples using standard touchscreen tech.”

“The technology would certainly seem a contender for the latest X-Prize [2], which requires the use of non-invasive techniques to diagnose illness. Given the ubiquity of touch screens it’s not surprising that alternative applications are being sought for them, and we look forward to the day we’re never more than gobbing distance of a diagnosis.”

Ed

I am not sure how this would work, but it does raise some interesting thoughts on what becomes possible with the next generation of consumer electronics tools. That speculation used to be a lot easier. No longer. Larry Niven’s ‘autodoc’ that also gives you a manicure seems closer…

I have been promoting prizes and x-projects for a long time. I was digging about looking for my S-Prizes slide show which I did years ago, and found something I said early on in this Century:

I can solve the space access problem with a few sentences.

Be it enacted by the Congress of the United States:

The Treasurer of the United States is directed to pay to the first American owned company (if corporate at least 60% of the shares must be held by American citizens) the following sums for the following accomplishments. No monies shall be paid until the goals specified are accomplished and certified by suitable experts from the National Science Foundation or the National Academy of Science:

1. The sum of $2 billion to be paid for construction of 3 operational spacecraft which have achieved low earth orbit, returned to earth, and flown to orbit again three times in a period of three weeks.

2. The sum of $5 billion to be paid for construction and maintenance of a space station which has been continuously in orbit with at least 5 Americans aboard for a period of not less than three years and one day. The crew need not be the same persons for the entire time, but at no time shall the station be unoccupied.

3. The sum of $12 billion to be paid for construction and maintenance of a Lunar base in which no fewer than 31 Americans have continuously resided for a period of not less than four years and one day.

4. The sum of $10 billion to be paid for construction and maintenance of a solar power satellite system which delivers at least 800 megawatts of electric power to a receiving station or stations in the United States for a period of at least two years and one day.

5. The payments made shall be exempt from all US taxes.

That would do it. Not one cent to be paid until the goals are accomplished. Not a bit of risk, and if it can’t be done for those sums, well, no harm done to the treasury.

I had Newt Gingrich persuaded to do this before he found he couldn’t keep the office of Speaker. I haven’t had any audiences with his successors.

Henry Vanderbilt points out that having a prize, say $1 billion,  for the second firm to achieve point (1) above will get more into the competition, and produce better results. I agree.

All of which remains true. There is a great deal more in the 2003 discussion on access to space. http://www.jerrypournelle.com/topics/gettospace.html#Prizes2

Which ought to give everyone something to look at while I go have lunch and come back to deal with the mail.

X PROGRAMS AND ACCESS TO SPACE

I just found this, which is my explanation of what X Programs should be.  http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/why_have_nasa.htm 

It is drawn from my testimony to the House Space Committee in 1995, and there’s nothing in it that I wouldn’t say today. This was when Newt was Speaker, and we thought we would be able to get this done. Unfortunately the President had other priorities. It would still be a good path.