Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

mothminds.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 134 posts

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#11

Post by 13415 »

nickff wrote: post #4

This is an interesting premise, but I'm not sure that the pool of potential grant recipients will be a very good one. The problem that I foresee is that people working on these sorts of projects seem to fall into two broad categories: -People who don't want to work for someone else, but lack vision and exist on social proof. These people will be attracted to the grant funding, but unable to use it to create something…

That is some pretty strong armchair folk psychology. I'd rather put the run-off-the-mill social Darwinist economics talk aside and focus on ways to evaluate a grant recipient's progress, with a positive attitude and helping them along the way. Startups also often fail, individual grants will not be different from that, and not everyone needs to be a brilliant genius to achieve something.

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#12

Post by Weryj »

benfarahmand wrote: post #6

If the goal is developing grantee self-efficacy, the funding should require pairing with a mentor. Finding a mentor that is willing to guide a grantee to bring an idea to fruition is also validation of that individual's ability to accomplish the task.

I think that follows the mentality of VC, the idea here seems to support agency and unique views on the world, for diverging from the path is when a new path is found. I think enforcing a mentor program would harm that goal.

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#13

Post by bsedlm »

koheripbal wrote: post #10

I would like $100k to work on the Collatz conjecture for 6 months. I have an idea that will probably fail, but if I had that money I would quit my job work my ass off for six months to flesh it out. But I have no credentials, no way to write a grant proposal, and even I wouldn't invest in myself. ....and yet if we did this sort of experiment 10000 times over, humanity might make some big breakthroughs because some of…

sounds a lot like what VCs are already doing, except they're interested in business, not big breakthroughs

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#14

Post by bsedlm »

nickff wrote: post #4

This is an interesting premise, but I'm not sure that the pool of potential grant recipients will be a very good one. The problem that I foresee is that people working on these sorts of projects seem to fall into two broad categories: -People who don't want to work for someone else, but lack vision and exist on social proof. These people will be attracted to the grant funding, but unable to use it to create something…

> The brilliant ones are so driven that they will often succeed without assistance.

but brilliance for truly novel things is usually only revealed in retrospect. Might as well say "the ones who succeeded are driven and brilliant because they succeeded"

also, you are implying lazyness is a vice (because work is virtue?) however lazyness is also whence the value of comfort (i.e. of making things eaiser) comes. I'm saying there's a positive side to lazyness. (similar to "drive" or ambition, there's pros and cons to it).

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#15

Post by kenferry »

koheripbal wrote: post #10

I would like $100k to work on the Collatz conjecture for 6 months. I have an idea that will probably fail, but if I had that money I would quit my job work my ass off for six months to flesh it out. But I have no credentials, no way to write a grant proposal, and even I wouldn't invest in myself. ....and yet if we did this sort of experiment 10000 times over, humanity might make some big breakthroughs because some of…

Maybe I’m misreading, but it SEEMS like this site is reverse kickstarter: I would like to FUND people to work on the Collatz conjecture, please apply.

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#16

Post by nickff »

13415 wrote: post #11
nickff wrote: post #4

This is an interesting premise, but I'm not sure that the pool of potential grant recipients will be a very good one. The problem that I foresee is that people working on these sorts of projects seem to fall into two broad categories: -People who don't want to work for someone else, but lack vision and exist on social proof. These people will be attracted to the grant funding, but unable to use it to create something…

That is some pretty strong armchair folk psychology. I'd rather put the run-off-the-mill social Darwinist economics talk aside and focus on ways to evaluate a grant recipient's progress, with a positive attitude and helping them along the way. Startups also often fail, individual grants will not be different from that, and not everyone needs to be a brilliant genius to achieve something.

>”Startups also often fail, individual grants will not be different from that, and not everyone needs to be a brilliant genius to achieve something.”

I agree, but I’m trying to point out that this plan has an adverse selection problem coupled with some other issues.

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#18

Post by nickff »

weego wrote: post #9
nickff wrote: post #4

This is an interesting premise, but I'm not sure that the pool of potential grant recipients will be a very good one. The problem that I foresee is that people working on these sorts of projects seem to fall into two broad categories: -People who don't want to work for someone else, but lack vision and exist on social proof. These people will be attracted to the grant funding, but unable to use it to create something…

I 'run' my own micro arts fund providing support for people in MH communities that would like supplies or tools to help as part of their ongoing rehab or change of career as a way of getting back into a life that means something. The answer really is if you expect a measurable outcome from small-scale investing in people then don't do it, you're in the wrong space. If you view your investment as a path to the outcome…

What you’re describing seems clearer and much more likely to succeed than the plan in the post. It sounds like you’re talking about enabling others to self-actualize, which is definitely a worthy goal (but not what the post seemed to be trying to achieve).

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#19

Post by codingdave »

bravogamma wrote: post #17

Tangential question. The painting at the top of the post is gorgeous. How did go about licensing it for use?

Gotta love image search --> https://rebeccaluncan.com/polyphemus-over-nashi/

I'm actually interested in your question, too, seeing how this is an original painting the artist is selling for $2600.

Re: Moth Minds: Fund individuals doing work you believe in

#20

Post by webmaven »

nickff wrote: post #4

This is an interesting premise, but I'm not sure that the pool of potential grant recipients will be a very good one. The problem that I foresee is that people working on these sorts of projects seem to fall into two broad categories: -People who don't want to work for someone else, but lack vision and exist on social proof. These people will be attracted to the grant funding, but unable to use it to create something…

Even if I accept your model of reality, there are some pretty big problems that a grant could address:

1) the categories of 'brilliant' and 'delusional' aren't mutually exclusive, especially since both are spectra rather than binary. They aren't entirely orthogonal, however.

2) 'brilliant' and 'delusional' are each qualities that are very hard to evaluate except in hindsight.

3) Finally, it is possible for someone who is brilliant and non-delusional to still fail (or be 'insufficiently driven' and give up rather than dying in poverty), or to succeed with no-one noticing (because they lack resources or skills for self-promotion).

There is no way to reliably sort the wheat from the chaff, except to give them space and time to succeed or fail.

Post reply on HN