> > > > No. > My point is that massive funding without having a prototype prior to > funding is worthless most of the times. > If prototype cannot be created at reasonably low cost then fully working > product > most likely cannot be created even with massive funding. >
Well, this seems to dissolve into a set of vagaries... How much funding is "massive" varies from domain to domain. E.g. it's hard to do anything in nanotech without really expensive machinery. For AGI, $10M is a lot of money, because the main cost is staff salaries, plus commodity hardware. For nanotech, $10M isn't all that much, since specialized hardware is needed to do many kinds of serious work. And, what counts as a prototype often depends on one's theoretical framework. Do you consider there to have been a prototype for the first atom bomb? I don't think there was, but there were preliminary experiments that, given the context of the framework of theoretical physics, made the workability of the atom bomb seem plausible. -- Ben ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=67466565-8e64f2
