prizes

Just because a newspaper receives a Pulitzer Prizes does not mean that it has no bias, or does not make mistakes.

The prizes won't be higher if they're given to international teams; they just might be awarded earlier.

One flaw comes to mind when the thought of using prizes to fund pure science is discussed.

Great prizes, no entry fee, and you won't be competing against anyone who has already sold 2 or more stories.

The goal of the 100 was to outlast the main contestant to also win prizes (usually less than the main).

But MS had a very strong hackathon sponsorship campaign last season (mentors, prizes, etc.) and that really does move the needle.

And the rewards and Nobel prizes went to those who did the math the fastest.

Most of a Dota player's income comes from tournament prizes, as opposed to say, corporate sponsorships, which are more popular in Starcraft.

Microsoft offers prizes at almost every one of these events for teams using Azure.

We just can’t afford to have NIH give out prizes to the entire world.

When they start talking about replacing the other $23.9+ billion in NIH grants with prizes, then we should worry.

No one is suggesting that all grants be replaced by prizes.

Here is an interesting question - are people less "greedy" if the prizes/points have a greater span?

The "colossally bad", "stupid" rhetoric would be justified if the proposal were for the NIH to give away a significant proportion of its budget in prizes: it's reasonably obvious that prizes can't be a mainstay of public research funding.

(Until the supply of these inevitably rose to meet its former "equilibrium" with demand.) If that's the opportunity cost of seeing if prizes can stimulate some successful research which will not otherwise be funded, then it seems like an arguable proposition, especially since prizes like the X-Prize are often claimed to stimulate research spending which is a multiple of the actual prize money awarded.

But the influence of the economist that mainly matters is an influence over laymen: politicians, journalists, civil servants and the public generally." Less important, but relevant note about the name: "Some critics argue that the prestige of the Prize in Economics derives in part from its association with the Nobel Prizes, an association that has often been a source of controversy.

, and it seems to be setting up something more like the X-Prizes, with at least the objectives (maybe not all the awards) spelled out in advance, than the Nobel Prize which is awarded retrospectively (and to the individuals who did the work, rather than to the project itself).