

Project 10^100 - newsit
http://www.project10tothe100.com/faq.html

======
lemonysnicket
I must say I am surprised at some of the comments that have already been left
here. I would think a community like HN would be excited to see a project come
out of the woodwork like this...at least _I was_ and heck, I've already
submitted an idea and may submit a couple more.

If, as everyone opines on here constantly, ideas have little to no value, but
rather it is the _execution_ of those ideas, why not submit ideas that may
have some validity, and let Google essentially play matchmaker and help find
the organization, people, and talent to execute on that idea?

~~~
newsit
Totally agreed, since I red it I've been thinking about ideas of my own to
submit.

If someone is going to spend 10 Million anyway, why not use the chance and
think about all the things that you wish were fixed or improved.

Unless you are Superman I doubt it you can fix everything in the world
yourself.

------
raghus
Here's an idea for Google. I don't very much care exactly how they implement
it but here's the outline:

1) Let various non-profits like the Red Cross or the Susan Komen Foundation
etc. register as 'Recipients' with Google's AdSense program

2) Let website publishers who are (perennially) stuck with sub $100 earnings
nominate one of these organizations to receive their AdSense balance- whether
it is $0.25 or $99.

Bingo! All that money that Google is sitting on gets put to work immediately
for worthy causes. Even if Google pays these orgs only when the total exceeds
$100, this would help a ton of people around the world.

------
mixmax
The incentive for submitting a great idea is sharply diminished by the fact
that you don't get to have a say at all in the implementation of it. The
project doesn't adhere well to the psychology of altruism.

~~~
sspencer
Yeah, I was thrilled with the $10 million available for funding until I
realized that I wouldn't actually get to work on my brilliant idea. Watching
someone else realize my dream project would be like some bizarre form of
torture.

I'll just do it myself...

------
tomek
and somewhere in fine print it says all submitted ideas are automatically
owned by google

------
rokhayakebe
It would be nice to see YC do a mini round, maybe funding 3 to 5 non-profit
with a Humanitarian goal.

~~~
lemonysnicket
a world-changing idea does not need to be not-for-profit. this is one of the
biggest misconceptions out there -- an idea that solves a problem for a sub-
group of humanity, does not need to run under an NGO/non-profit umbrella.

~~~
ph0rque
Also see <http://paulgraham.com/good.html>

------
Allocator2008
I'm not buying. As Howard Roarke, the protagonist in 'The Fountainhead' says,
"The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing."

We don't need more altruism or nobless-oblige. We need more innovation.
Google, who all but started the cloud computing model, is a leader in
innovation. They should stick with what they are good at, technological
innovation, and not have some kind of save the world guilt trip. The world
benefits most by a Google that is focused on the one thing they are great at:
search and a cloud computing dev environment.

Don't save us, google. Just keep up the good work. That way, by benefiting
from your technology, we can save ourselves. :-)

~~~
shimon
Wow, it's like someone invented a time machine and invited a 14-year-old-me to
come and comment on hacker news.

Seriously though, many hackers have loved Ayn Rand's ideas, but the simple
biological fact is that we get gratification from helping people and we feel,
to some extent, the pain of people whose suffering we see. Our evolved nature
is hacked to make us not perfectly selfish.

~~~
nazgulnarsil
actually, empathy is simply the most effective way of convincing others that
you care about their interests. this perceived commonality of interests is
what holds society together. but the motivation is ultimately selfish because
we only want to band together to increase our own chances for survival and the
survival of our offspring.

~~~
shawndrost
That's just empirically false, unless you're using "motivation" in some
convoluted and incorrect way. Humans are innately motivated to help each
other[1], and though that motivation was evolutionarily selected for its
positive effects on gene survival, it is now a fundamental human desire that I
find noble and beautiful.

[1] See
[http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2006/03/02/altruism060302.htm...](http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2006/03/02/altruism060302.html)
or <http://www.justfuckinggoogleit.com>

~~~
nazgulnarsil
_it is now a fundamental human desire_

I didn't claim otherwise. we are adaptation executers, not gene survival
maximizers. this is why it is so important to keep in mind how changes in our
environment can have unintended consequences. witness the dual rise of food
processed heavily with sugar and degenerative diseases such as diabetes.

------
Ardit20
It is not selfishness nor altruism. It is their execution.

Anyone would be dumb not to see that Google through this project is trying to
milk people for ideas for nothing in return.

We all want to help that is true (well besides the psychopaths and that's like
2% of the population) but if someone else is profiting from my help, the way
Google most probably would, is just hurtfully cheating.

