21–30 of 141 posts
More information: "Officers who develop new technologies at CIA Labs will be allowed to patent, license, and profit from their work, making 15% of the total income from the new invention with a cap of $150,000 per year. That could double most agency salaries and make the work more competitive with Silicon Valley." : https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/21/1008654/cias-new...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. The point is that you don't take the risk. You have a job. You get a salary. This usually means that you have no risk and no upside. The idea here is that you have some upside, but still take no risk. IDK if this works in practice, but the principle is that.
You still take a risk because if your project fails for whatever reason, you're stuck on a CIA salary, rather than a SV salary where you'd probably be making twice as much even if your project fails there too.
Last I’ve read on HN, most founders are not making “SV salary” because they’re expecting the golden ticket. Here, it appears you get an equivalent salary + job security with a capped upside.
More information: "Officers who develop new technologies at CIA Labs will be allowed to patent, license, and profit from their work, making 15% of the total income from the new invention with a cap of $150,000 per year. That could double most agency salaries and make the work more competitive with Silicon Valley." : https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/21/1008654/cias-new...
What if the buyer of the technology is the US govt? Will those Officers have to give it to them for free?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like a strange proposition, I take all the risk of creating a new technology that will likely fail, and then if I beat the odds and succeed I'm capped at 150k? Also, if I'm not allowed to monetize my technology or patents, do I really own them? Is this just a bad startup incubator?
You absolutely don't take all the risk of creating a new technology. You get paid an excellent defense sector salary unconditionally, with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Plus you get tons of resources and the inside track to talk to "the client", you're not working out of your garage.
I would imagine CIA officers get a regular civil service salary, which is emphatically not the high salaries that contractors earn.
More information: "Officers who develop new technologies at CIA Labs will be allowed to patent, license, and profit from their work, making 15% of the total income from the new invention with a cap of $150,000 per year. That could double most agency salaries and make the work more competitive with Silicon Valley." : https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/21/1008654/cias-new...
That seems like a very low cap. It will incentivize people to break up their "inventions" into as many possible separate "up to $150K" revenue streams as possible.
It appeals to sharp minds that wouldn't tolerate the risks and logistics of being an entrepreneur in a startup. Especially if they want to guarantee food and a comfortable life for their family while they're working on their project.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like a strange proposition, I take all the risk of creating a new technology that will likely fail, and then if I beat the odds and succeed I'm capped at 150k? Also, if I'm not allowed to monetize my technology or patents, do I really own them? Is this just a bad startup incubator?
You absolutely don't take all the risk of creating a new technology. You get paid an excellent defense sector salary unconditionally, with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Plus you get tons of resources and the inside track to talk to "the client", you're not working out of your garage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You absolutely don't take all the risk of creating a new technology. You get paid an excellent defense sector salary unconditionally, with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Plus you get tons of resources and the inside track to talk to "the client", you're not working out of your garage.
> ...with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Could you elaborate on that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You absolutely don't take all the risk of creating a new technology. You get paid an excellent defense sector salary unconditionally, with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Plus you get tons of resources and the inside track to talk to "the client", you're not working out of your garage.
> ...with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Could you elaborate on that?
For comparison I work at a university and we get 20 days PTO on day 1. Plus very long holidays (2 weeks in december / january when the semester is out).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like a strange proposition, I take all the risk of creating a new technology that will likely fail, and then if I beat the odds and succeed I'm capped at 150k? Also, if I'm not allowed to monetize my technology or patents, do I really own them? Is this just a bad startup incubator?
No. The point is that you don't take the risk. You have a job. You get a salary. This usually means that you have no risk and no upside. The idea here is that you have some upside, but still take no risk. IDK if this works in practice, but the principle is that.