Google Announces Project 10^100 Winners

Kilrah_il writes with news that Google has selected winners for Project 10^100, a contest to find the best ideas to change the world. Among the winners is the Khan Academy, which we've discussed previously. Google is "providing $2 million to support the creation of more courses and to enable the Khan Academy to translate their core library into the world’s most widely spoken languages." The other winning projects are: FIRST, an organization fostering math and science education through team competition; Public.Resource.Org, a government transparency effort focused on online access to public documents; Shweeb, a silly-looking method of human-powered urban transit; and the African Institute for Mathematical Sciences, a center aimed at promoting graduate-level math and science education in Africa.

Comments

Interesting Ideas

[BJ_Covert_Action]

I like most of the projects that the summary mentioned. The Shweeb one is a bit...odd...however. From their website:

We tend not to like travelling because it’s uncomfortable, there’s not much space, not enough leg room, we spend our time stuck in traffic or on a broken down train... and we are completely powerless to do anything about it.

The design principles of Shweeb aim to put you, the traveller, back in control of your own space, time and power.

Their design seems to consist of locking oneself in a suspended bubble and peddling your way to your destination. So....to clarify, they talk about the problems of transportation including not having enough leg room or space, and their solution is for you to lock yourself in a bubble....hmmmmm.

Honestly, after looking at that project, I have to ask, "Why the hell wouldn't I just walk to my destination? Or ride my bike?"

Re:Interesting Ideas

[Col. Klink (retired)]

And the bubbles are on a track. Can you even pass a slower-moving Schweeb?

Re:Interesting Ideas

[FooAtWFU]

The nice thing about something like bicycling is that it's not very capital-intensive (you don't need to build a lot of junk to make it work). The nice thing about something capital-intensive like a monorail is that it's high-speed, high-capacity, and effective.

It looks like Schweeb has managed to avoid all of these virtues. So, uh, what's left? The bubble might make an okay windshield in the rain, maybe.

Re:Interesting Ideas

[Anonymous Coward]

You're assuming a lack of parallel tracks. This is not a unique problem. The same issue faces roads -- you can't pass someone if there's only one lane.

If we're assuming only one track, then passing is not the largest issue -- going in the *other direction* is.

Re:Interesting Ideas

[iammani]

What if a bunch of people refuse to pedal; say 9/10 refuse to pedal, would the system still work?

Re:Interesting Ideas

[TheLink]

The bubble might make an okay windshield in the rain, maybe.

I'm living in an equatorial zone, and it sure looks like a mini greenhouse tube to me. Sure they talk about ventilation holes, but I'm not convinced...

Anyway, overall it looks like a stupid idea. Not sure why it won a prize.

Re:Interesting Ideas

[MattskEE]

They address many of these issues in the FAQ if you follow the link:
>and head-to-tail collisions would be a real problem.
There are long springy bumpers of some sort to make this impact very gentle. The energy is used to push the first driver ahead, it is not dissipated.

>And if you are moving in a chain of schweebs, there will be the inevitable lazy guy somewhere in the chain not pedaling or pretending to pedal, so someone else will do all the work.
This is a problem to an extent. However because of the high mechanical efficiency (greater than an enclosed recumbent bike they say) and the increased efficiency of moving together in a line, it will be tolerant to a certain amount of laziness without significantly increasing the work of the others. Furthermore there are monitoring sensors, and you could presumably be identified in your pod via schweeb membership card you swipe to get in the pod, and problematic riders could be penalized or banned.

>And if the schweeb capsules are publicly shared not privately owned, they'll get really, really gross and sweaty.
They say it uses 1/3 the power of walking at 5km/h (30 watts vs. 100) so even an out of shape person should not break a sweat. However I would be concerned about the sun heating them up...

>And if everybody is commuting in one direction and they are a shared public resource, all the schweebs will end up at one end of the line...
If x number of people go from point A to point B in the morning, then most of those people will go from B to A in the evening. Thus no pods pile up in any one location. Thus they just need to monitor usage and add new pods based on demand by location, plus extra to account for variability. And they will probably implement some sort of "tugboat" pod to move the pods between stations if pods start piling up in one location.

I admit I several of the same misgivings at first. Here are some problems I still see:
-The weirdness factor will turn people off regardless of utility and efficiency.
-The economic viability has yet to be established, because it's a new concept.
-Will there be airflow to maintain comfort on a sunny day without compromising aerodynamics? The pods look like a little greenhouse.

Re:Interesting Ideas

[Rakishi]

So when it's 95F you want to be in a nearly airtight transparent plastic bubble? Seriously? Think about it for a minute.

Re:Shweeb

[FooAtWFU]

Is Google doing a disservice to its voters here?

"Drive innovation in public transportation" was one of the five winning ideas, voted on by the public. Google Inc. subsequently searched the globe and selected Shweeb as the organisation with the most forward looking transportation vision and with the relevant expertise to implement such an idea.

Seriously. That's the best you can come up with? I agree that it's completely oblivious to reality, if that's what you meant by "the most forward-looking vision".

Re:Not Enough Hype for the Khan Academy!

[CentTW]

This seems like an excellent opportunity to throw a little money at an interesting education opportunity, and see how it pays off.

Where is anyone talking about see how this 'pays off'? How do you tell if it 'pays off'? Anecdotal evidence is just that and not the substitute for a scientific evaluation. How about we spend some of the money to explore that?

The payoff is in the improved education of people who choose to use the Khan Academy to supplement their education. If it's popular, someone will likely fund a study to see how effective it is. Google apparently believes in it enough that they're willing to fund the site directly, rather than a study of it.

Now you're demonizing Google for giving 1/289th that amount to an institution that will likely reach 50+ times the audience, who are probably more in need of a better education anyway?

Don't you think that something that has the potential to reach a much wider audience should be carefully tested before released into the wild?

No. While I definitely agree that mandatory class material should be tested, I don't think anyone's talking about making Khan Academy mandatory. Everything on the Internet has the potential to reach a lot of people. Not everything on the Internet should be carefully tested.