Cambrian House
Yep. I may have misunderstood this prize but if it is about "drive innovators to solve some of the greatest challenges facing the world today."... well, my idea seems OK to me.
Granting money for it will 'drive' (high-profile law specialists) to become 'innovators' (because the field is pretty empty now, AFAIK nothing major was discovered or even done since 1972, during the Sierra Club v. Morton lawsuit) in order to 'solve' (or at least do something!) the pollution problem, which is one of the 'greatest challenges facing the world today'.
Many, especially in IT fields, think that 'innovation' implies some engineering (or even science! What about 'discoveries'?). Law also have innovators. Moreover this idea may have some double effect because the underlying process is somewhat new, therefore it is not about creating some classic setup which will innovate but innovating in order to set some innovators up.
But I may be misleaded and learned that an idea not immediately grasping interest is often to be dubbed 'zombie', as it is only apparently alive. It's OK for me to forget about this one, albeit it is good :-)
More gold has been mined from the thoughts of men than has been taken from the earth.Napoleon Hill
Cambrian House began as a crowdsourcing community using a wisdom of crowds based approach to discover new business and technology ideas. These pages are being kept online as a technology demo to showcase Chaordix™.
Looking to harness the power of your crowd? Find out about Chaordix™ - technology that enables enterprises to get the most out of crowdsourcing.
People
X Prize Brainstorm
 |
natmaka
    Member since: Dec 26, 2007 Rank: Noble (75 Posts) |
[Quote Member] |
Let's fight pollution thanks to the usual market rules, thanks to people usually only paid by polluters.
The idea is to create a company which will sue every polluter, asking for the highest possible damages.
The company may for example organize class actions.
Awarded damages will pay the company and the rest will be given as a grant to some related pollution fighters (local, official and clean, for example a recognized association or even a public body). This will be explained to the judges and the company's accounting will be fully disclosed.
Anyone will be able to join a team in the company, thanks to some cooptation process. Some/most may even be consultants. Each team will pursue its own cases and earn from them.
Slacking teams (obtaining damages inferior to their cost for the company) will be dismantled. Competition among teams will be fueled by a jackpot: a share of any gain will be kept and the total sum will periodically be given to the group which fetched the highest amount of damages.
This way the company will attract aggressive and efficient people (mainly lawyers), usually not interested in low-paying positions offered by associations and official bodies in charge of pollution fighting. Most will be mercenaries, 'contract killers' mainly if not only interested in earning money, because each group will earn a given fraction of any damages it collects. They will carefully handle the cases, they will collect all evidence and pertinent laws, they will be on a par with the law offices mandated by the polluters.
Pertinent specialists will not team up by themselves because deciding who will run the show will let them fighting for years. Therefore the project needs an investment (to create the first team then select and pay for the expenses of a first set of trials) which will be reimbursed thanks to collected damages. The first batch of lawyers will be selected by a counsel made of prominent and concerned people. This first batch will build the team by hiring other members (secretaries, research assistants...). All relevant information (debates, votes, contractors, hired employees...) will be made public.
This company may in fact be a foundation but, quite frankly and bluntly, I don't like this approach because a foundation only has to spend money, while a company must earn (for this project this implies winning, which in turn implies fighting).
This approach can be used on some other generic problems.
The idea is to create a company which will sue every polluter, asking for the highest possible damages.
The company may for example organize class actions.
Awarded damages will pay the company and the rest will be given as a grant to some related pollution fighters (local, official and clean, for example a recognized association or even a public body). This will be explained to the judges and the company's accounting will be fully disclosed.
Anyone will be able to join a team in the company, thanks to some cooptation process. Some/most may even be consultants. Each team will pursue its own cases and earn from them.
Slacking teams (obtaining damages inferior to their cost for the company) will be dismantled. Competition among teams will be fueled by a jackpot: a share of any gain will be kept and the total sum will periodically be given to the group which fetched the highest amount of damages.
This way the company will attract aggressive and efficient people (mainly lawyers), usually not interested in low-paying positions offered by associations and official bodies in charge of pollution fighting. Most will be mercenaries, 'contract killers' mainly if not only interested in earning money, because each group will earn a given fraction of any damages it collects. They will carefully handle the cases, they will collect all evidence and pertinent laws, they will be on a par with the law offices mandated by the polluters.
Pertinent specialists will not team up by themselves because deciding who will run the show will let them fighting for years. Therefore the project needs an investment (to create the first team then select and pay for the expenses of a first set of trials) which will be reimbursed thanks to collected damages. The first batch of lawyers will be selected by a counsel made of prominent and concerned people. This first batch will build the team by hiring other members (secretaries, research assistants...). All relevant information (debates, votes, contractors, hired employees...) will be made public.
This company may in fact be a foundation but, quite frankly and bluntly, I don't like this approach because a foundation only has to spend money, while a company must earn (for this project this implies winning, which in turn implies fighting).
This approach can be used on some other generic problems.
 |
GordonMcDowell
Member since: Aug 15, 2006 Rank: Viking King (925 Posts) |
[Quote Member] |
On January 18, 2008, 2:38 am natmaka said:Did you mean to post this to THIS forum thread? This X Prize thread?
The idea is to create a company which will sue every polluter, asking for the highest possible damages.
 |
Callum
Member since: Jan 13, 2008 Rank: Noble (62 Posts) |
[Quote Member] |
Well since X-prize is most famous for its competition in space what about a total opposite direction to the sea bed?
We have so much to learn from ocean like creatures unseen, weather forecasting (tsunami's ect.) and maybe even generating energy.
There is a million and one things you could do with an X-Prize and the ocean. And a fair few of them could make humanity better off.
this was a very vague idea! I was just hoping people could expand on it!
We have so much to learn from ocean like creatures unseen, weather forecasting (tsunami's ect.) and maybe even generating energy.
There is a million and one things you could do with an X-Prize and the ocean. And a fair few of them could make humanity better off.
this was a very vague idea! I was just hoping people could expand on it!
 |
ccozad
Member since: Jul 31, 2007 Rank: Viking King (918 Posts) |
[Quote Member] |
Related to the under the sea idea, I would love to see a contest centered around generating energy from the sea. (alternative energy, not burning fossil fuels)
The contest winner would be the person who can generate the most energy per dollar.
The contest winner would be the person who can generate the most energy per dollar.
|
|
natmaka
Member since: Dec 26, 2007 Rank: Noble (75 Posts) |
[Quote Member] |
On January 18, 2008, 9:29 am GordonMcDowell said:
This X Prize thread?
Yep. I may have misunderstood this prize but if it is about "drive innovators to solve some of the greatest challenges facing the world today."... well, my idea seems OK to me.
Granting money for it will 'drive' (high-profile law specialists) to become 'innovators' (because the field is pretty empty now, AFAIK nothing major was discovered or even done since 1972, during the Sierra Club v. Morton lawsuit) in order to 'solve' (or at least do something!) the pollution problem, which is one of the 'greatest challenges facing the world today'.
Many, especially in IT fields, think that 'innovation' implies some engineering (or even science! What about 'discoveries'?). Law also have innovators. Moreover this idea may have some double effect because the underlying process is somewhat new, therefore it is not about creating some classic setup which will innovate but innovating in order to set some innovators up.
But I may be misleaded and learned that an idea not immediately grasping interest is often to be dubbed 'zombie', as it is only apparently alive. It's OK for me to forget about this one, albeit it is good :-)
Certainly anyone can propose a prize directly to their website, but if you'd like to brainstorm a bit first, this the the thread to do it in! Since submissions on xprize.org are private, posting your ideas here is the only way people can iterate off them.
Posted: January 17, 2008, 12:44 pm