Slashdot Mirror
No Cash Prize for Next DARPA Grand Challenge
General Lee's Peking writes to mention an Associated Press article about a sad development in the DARPA Grand Challenge. Because of some new DoD-related legislation, the organization will no longer be able to award the $2 Million prize to grand challenge winners. It's not all bad, though; they still get a trophy. From the article: "The absence of a lucrative cash prize has forced some teams to retool their game plan and others to drop out. Some fear it would be harder to attract corporate sponsors and hurt media coverage of the race, which drew a throng of reporters last year and inspired a PBS documentary. 'The icing on the cake is gone,' said Ivar Schoenmeyr, team leader of California-based Team CyberRider, which is retrofitting a Toyota Prius hybrid."
So much for recovering my development expenses on these ideas:
note: Sharks with Lasers is someone else's idea so I clearly can't try to compete with that one.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Stifling innovation- find out the Congress folks who pushed this legislation through and make sure their staff do a little "constituent services"
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/darpa/program.html
The DoD could always offer other forms of remuneration to the winner. Such a awarding contracts for supplies, such as $500 toilet seats and $250 hammers...nyet?
Solid Snake's gonna be VERY disappointed...
...wait, what DARPA were we talking about, again?
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
A competition where the prize is $0! What a brilliant idea! Much cheaper to run than a regular competition! I'm amazed someone didn't think of that before.
Oh no... it's the future.
Why can't I order that at my local Chinese restaurant?
Monstar L
Step 1. Buy Lexus LS460 with autopark
Step 2. Put ls460 backwards at starting line, tell it to park at finish line.
Step 3. Profit.
Business as usual for the military industry.
What if they don't need the contest anymore? Last year's winner did amazingly well from what I remember. What if they already have what they want?
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
yeah, cuz building a car that can drive itself is of absolutely no fucking benefit to humanity at all...
Yes. The money which is no longer available was prize money, as well as milestone prizes for the track B teams. The difference between track A and track B is that track A gives all its technology to the government at the end (in exchange for $1 million of development money), and track B has no such obligation. The track A funds (contracts rather than prizes) are still fully intact, so all of the track A teams are still in it. What's been cut out is the incentive for track B teams to enter. These are the teams that are NOT giving technology directly to the government, and are using the race as a vehicle for development of technology that can truly benefit the world in ways other than making robot death jeeps. Say, for example, saving hundreds of thousands of lives in traffic accidents every year.
So yes, I would much rather see a portion of the DoD's budget spent encouraging development of revolutionary safety technology for civilian drivers rather than a big contract to a traditional defense contractor for something that directly kills people. (Keep in mind, the funds were not -cut-, DARPA's authority to use them for prizes was simply removed.)
A government program is working and inexpensive? It must be stopped!!!!!!!
"Hey, you know that amazing technology that we want you guys to build for us? Do you think you could do that for free instead?"
Interesting enough VW have already done it, see:n s_its.html
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/04/vw_abando
The VW Lupo is available but it only does 78.4mpg(US). Their development car did much better: 0.89 litres of diesel per 100 kilometres (264 mpg) top speed was still 75mph. but they could not make the commercial version cheaper than $25K
$25M for first family car that gets over 100 mpg at $40,000 price
To be awarded posthumously?
It's easy enough to build such a car. Easy enough that it's been done many times over the past century.
All you have to do to achieve it is give up something else. We can strive for efficiency, but we canna change the laws of physics.
KFG
It sounds like it's just a bureaucratic (sp?) paperwork shuffle. The money will be available. And if not, I'm sure they can find a few congressmen/women to either put pressure on the DoD or write a bill to specifically authorize the money. No one wants to look either "soft on terror" or "unconcerned about troop safety", so this will all work out. Hell, I'm sure Bush, as CIC, can move the money if needed.
-- Fugacity: Confusing chemists since 1908
RTFA - Although DARPA has pulled the award, the current legislation does not bar awards. It moves the authorization level up one position above the DARPA director.
All they now have to do is get permission from their boss.
It appears they have chosen the ignorant route and - instead of getting requested authorization - simply claim they are not allowed
Sounds like typical Government Bureaucrats to me.
While I think your point is valid, I do think that the prize money added to the overall prestige of the competition, which was a motivating factor for many to enter.
Also, it seemed that the top winners actually spent more to win the competition than what they received in prize money. Not saying that the prize money didn't help to recoup costs though. It could have this positive effect in that if someone doesn't win they won't see it as a crushing blow to their finances.
Give up? What are these laws you talk of, I don't know about you, but I'm American: I give up nothing and I write my own damned laws!
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
Just using today's technology, you could probably get pretty close to 100 mpg with a Prius, good lithium batteries, and additional solar powered charging (to eliminate need to plug-in the hybrid). Hand modifications would easily push the cost above $40K, but cheaply mass producing such a vehicle seems theoretically feasible, and certainly doesn't violate any laws of physics.
Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
Just get corporate sponsorship for the prize. The purse could actually become a lot larger... I would think the big guys would kill to have their names splashed around on all the videos of the contest.
Abandon technology prizes.
They are insane.
Seastead this.
Princeton hopefully wins
Why in the world would you say that? You're not one of those people that thinks bigger necessarily equals safer, are you?
Sure, you might have to give up the ability to, um, I don't know. Help me out here - what exactly would you have to give up? The ability to accelerate quickly? Nope. The ability to decelerate quickly? Nope. What would you have to give up? Which "laws of physics" would one have to change? (I have an MS in Astrophysics, so don't feel that you have to speak to the layman.)
I will say this - when you're accelerating quickly you won't be getting your 100 mpg. But you can have the ability to accelerate quickly (say in an emergency) and still average 100 mpg. Forgive me for saying so, but it's not rocket science. :)
OK, so maybe you'll have to give up your "8 MPG" license plate (I actually saw one of these), but really, is that asking so much?
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
I'm on the Princeton DARPA team, and we're on Track B. The prize money at the end was a nice incentive and certainly garnered attention for the competition, but that's not where the real harm lies. For passing the site visit, there was a prize of $50,000, and for making it to the finals, a $250,000 prize (don't quote me on the amounts, that's just my recollection). These milestone prizes would've gone a long way to offset the financial disparity between Track A teams (who've received substantial DARPA grants) and the Track B teams. We're on a shoestring budget, and that money would've been incredibly useful. Instead, we now have to go the entire distance without a dime from the government.
------
http://pave.princeton.edu/
Just using today's technology, you could probably get pretty close to 100 mpg with a Prius
I could achieve it with a Chevette using yesterday's technolgy. Hell, I got 60 mpg out of a box stock 1976 Fiesta, in traffic, once upon a time, as a demonstration of how much driving style effects gas milage (the Prius is not immune from this effect. Some of its reported efficiency comes from the fact that its drivers are preselected to focus on economy in their driving). I'll give you 3000 mpg gallon with yesterday's technology; if you're willing to give up enough for it. With real mpg figures, not some conversion of mppc (miles per pound of coal) into mpg.
If we're going allow conversion factors I could also build you a car that gets the equivilent of 3000 mpg, burns a wide variety of bio or synthetic fuels at the same time and costs only a few thousand dollars, but you'd have to give up far too much for most people to bear.
Chiefly their lack of physical fitness.
KFG
that or make the prius with a TDI engine... the '03 Jetta TDI (no electric just a normal IC engine) gets 50Mpg... build that into a hybrid (ie a prius) and you should be able to get MUCH better Mpg...
Just my $.02
Aaron Z
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote
"some new DoD-related legislation"
We can't spend $2M on DARPA, which gives us results like the Internet, GPS, etc. We've got to spend it on 12 minutes in Iraq.
--
make install -not war
Fair enough. I did misunderstand what you were *driving* at.
Yes, if you're one of those prepubescent kids (which I'm guessing you're not) that likes to always gun your car from the stop-light, then it's unlikely you'll be able to get 100 mpg. However, if your concern is that you want the *ability* to accelerate quickly - e.g., in an emergency - then you can still get your 100 mpg. And, yes, of course, you can't have an unaerodynamic car or a ridiculously massive car and still get 100 mpg. However, I don't see that there's anything unrealistic that you have to sacrifice.
I really can't tell if you're being sarcastic here or not. (After the preceding paragraph - which I snipped out - I suspect you might be.) The first phrase makes sense, but you seem to be implying that the only way to get 100 mpg is to go really, really slow. Am I misunderstanding you again?
On the other hand, I also believe that once people are *willing* to give things up, they find that their lives are actually better. I walk to "work" every day, and I've really come to enjoy that part of my day - even when it rains.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
I currently own a Civic Hybrid, and although these don't get 100 mpg yet, they have excellent acceleration, great comfort, very low noise levels, and sufficient cargo capacity. I'm confident that in the future, someone will be able to design a car that gets 100 mpg, has just as good acceleration, just as good comfort, just as low (if not lower) noise levels, and even better cargo capacity. As for noise levels especially, my experience is that higher mpg cars tend to be quieter, not louder.
Oh, and before you mention highway driving, I get almost 50 mpg on the highway in my hybrid with me and 3 passengers. (Which could be interpreted as almost 200 mpg per occupant.)
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
The prize money is kind of like a lottery drawing, except that it's based on knowledge and skill, not so much on luck. It attracts teams who will enter despite the fact that there may be better returns on their investments of time and creativity.
The cash price would generate far more media attention than a simple awards ceremony. If we want to encourage people to invest in science and technology, this is a good way to do it.
It was non-sensical to kill it.
I'll make a public committment of $200 towards a future Darpa Grand Challenge prize, if 10,000 other people will do the same. (I'll leave it as an exercise to Slashdotters to figure out the best way to use pledgebank along with a credible escrow system to accomplish this.)
Call up Bangalore U. That's where the DoD contractors are investing money.
For a trivial investment they were getting huge benefits.
Yet they'll continue wasting money hand over fist for way less return elsewhere in government.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
ya, we are supposed to have checks and balances, etc. Perhaps you need to take a gander at the issue of "signing statements", and read what the attorney general has to say about federal judges who might actually want to do their jobs. They have just been told to fuck off, to put it impolitely but in normal phraseology.
Oh ya, and the little matter of blackbox voting....links a-plenty there. Sure go ahead and vote! You have zero guarantees anymore, they can completely control the vote and you won't know-or be able to do-anything about it. Now, I will vote, but only from inertia. I knew this jig was up three elections ago when they got away with the hijacking, and then it happened *again*, and then again. It is the *system* now, entrenched, it is *controlled*.
All we have now is the executive branch issuing edicts. That's it. That's called a police state. The other branches are now for political show business purposes, to maintain the illusion. We now live in a dictatorship that arose from a bona fide coup, complete with a reichstagg fire event, and one which just passed a new version of the enabling act.
... like when some aide lined out the entire Space Environment Center from NOAA's budget a few years ago -- after all, space is outside NOAA's bailiwick, so what are those goons doing? Turns out they're only ensuring the ongoing safety of the electrical grid and all of our comsats, phone systems, and aviation network... ... or like when, in 1998, I and a host of colleages traveled to the island of Guadeloupe to study a solar eclipse, and none of our colleagues from the Naval Research Laboratory had a place to stay. Following DoD regulations, the NRL travel office had moved them from the recommended hotel to a much cheaper one just barely within the required search radius of 15 miles -- but that happened to be on a different island...
Unfortunately, the vast majority of laws and regulations are composed in a hurry by college interns or harried public servants.
President Bush you !
Slashdot is powered by your submission.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c109:./temp/ ~c109i6ly2s
Signed on October 17th. Look in Section 212, which has this:
(A) by striking `Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency' and inserting `Director of Defense Research and Engineering and the service acquisition executive for each military department'; and
Emphasis mine. You can see that now they have to add a dude (assuming that Director of Defense of DARPA is now "Director of Defense Research and Engineering", otherwise it's out of DARPA's hands all together). Maybe it's just a matter of signatures, but I can see how they have been forced to put the award on hold until they can, you know, obey the law as Congress has fiddled with it. And I confess that I haven't looked at the legislation that this section amends, which is:
Subsection (a) of section 2374a of title 10, United States Code
We don't need to hear about some random badly-designed pick-up truck or SUV. (jacked up 3 feet, with leaf springs, with an extra ton of chrome on the roof...) We all know.
Extra distance between you and the impact point means that the impact can take longer, thus reducing the forces. For crashing into a wall, this means you should have a long hood.
Extra mass is helpful if the other object has some give, either via crushing or via being tossed the other way. Of course this applies to trees, railings, people, motercycles, and anything else you might mow down. It also applies to big things which try to mow you down.
The leading teams this time are Stanford/Volkswagen, CMU/General Motors, and Oshkosh Truck. The prize doesn't matter to either. And all three already got $1 million in Government money. Each.
It's a much tougher job this time. Driving in traffic, backing out of tight spots, parking and unparking. I'll be surprised if anyone wins the first year, because nobody knows quite what to expect. Year two, someone will win.
I dont understand how Haliburton and Kellog, Brown & Root can walk away will billions or logistical work while true research and hard work by our next generation of scientists isnt worth $2m?
Companies can spend BILLIONS buying all of the congress and whitehouse, but allow DARPA to spend a million to get something done, well.....
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Well if they aren't funding a Grand challenge its because they are funding the URBAN challenge. Instead of driving around a desert, we are supposed to drive around an "urban landscape" and be able to pass cars, follow california traffic laws etc. Another big change is that they are funding university teams in-ADVANCE! Our team got $1Million straight up, so we can buy a new car and all the electronics and sensors we need to make the best system possible. Since we are all students, the system we build IS going to be the best, as our interests all lie in this field, i.e. we do it because we love it, not 'cause we have to. I've heard of many other universities and programs that are also receieving funding, so if anything, they are pitching out more money that before!
Jimmy Hoffa is nowhere to be found, but those darn syndicalists still influence the government...
Thanks for all the money!
Sorry about your kids.
-Love,
Halliburton
I've heard this logic before, and it sounds good. However, I can also cite cases where bigger is worse, and not just for a particularly bad design decision. Case in point, I was in an accident a little over a year ago involving a tractor trailer and my 1995 Honda Civic, traveling 70 mph down I-85 in Georgia. The tractor trailer clipped my back wheel, sending me out of control and hit me again on the driver's side door. My wife (in the passenger seat) and I managed to get out of our car without a scratch. Now, I'm not going to tell you that the semi-truck was worse off (mainly because it wasn't), but imagine what would have happened if we had been driving a tractor trailer. Most likely, it would have been a serious pile-up.
Now (as with your examples) this is just speculation and case-by-case analysis. In order to really understand, you have to look at the studies done. Studies find that people driving bigger vehicles are no more (or less) likely to be injured/killed than those in smaller cars. They are, however, more likely to kill others. Perhaps it's because they drive more recklessly (see "Why Things Bite Back"), or maybe it's just that those vehicles are designed worse. We can't really know. All we know is what the data tells us.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Am I the only one who realizes that the prize money at the end was almost purely for press? Most of the teams who had a serious chance at winning were spending far more money than that to create the vehicle. Faculty at countless universities are getting tons of money in grants from the DoD and other government contractors. These grants fund PhD students normally, and their work often goes into new algorithms and designs that can be used in vehicles later. Normally a team of undergrads and MS students would actually assemble the vehicle.
Then when a team wins, it's not like the money is split up. It normally just goes right back into the professors research lab, to help fund new innovation. Also, even though a million dollars looks like a lot of money, in terms of government funding for research projects it really isnt that much. Assuming $100k of the money goes to new lab equipment, that leaves $900k to goto funding grad students. At ~$50k/year that's 18 grad student years. If the professor has 6 grad students, then the grant can fund them all for 3 years. More likely though, more of the money gets spent in other ways, travel/conference expenses, professor pay during the summers, etc.
As far as the transfer of the technology... Most of the new techniques used have already been published by the time a team wins. The exact implementation of the vehicle isn't particularly interesting, but maybe what designs worked and what didn't. That again would likely be in a published work for a lot of these teams, as professors love publishing.