You didn't propose any prizes for your field, which is disappointing, but your post is nevertheless surprisingly rational. Not one single cuss-word, expletive, or flagrant insult (as opposed to condescension which is everyone's right here) :-)

Anyhow, are you sure shareholders could successfully sue a company for pursuing a prize? It's not a sound business judgment to pursue one? GRANTED, companies supposedly don't do much research (according to D.C. bureaucrats who use that assertion as a "justification" for their sometimes mere make-work programs). But pursuing a prize is like doing research and development with a cognizable payoff on the horizon, independently of potential marketability. Regardless, though, I've never claimed that huge companies like Boeing and Lockheed (which force us to need RUSSIAN technology to service our own station) would win many prizes. But Boeing began in a garage and big companies of tomorrow could be incentivized if prizes were finally available.

Where adequately tailored prizes fail to generate suitable entrepreneurial or prize-pursuing interest, they're not worth using as the sole means of seeking truly worthwhile knowledge. We've seen that the status quo has failed many times over, though. Meanwhile, our national debt's about to boil over. October's the anticipated month. Extensions and increases tend to come about but we're an old nation and we no longer lead the world in attracting foreign investment even if we do have the world's largest trade deficit AND national debt. For science's sake, and for entrepreneurs', I continue advocating that competitive prizes be offered more prevalently with our hard-earned tax dollars. Our country's sort of the cradle of democracy and is worth protecting from the fate of former empires (United Kingdom; France; Spain; Rome; etc.).

Einstein said if you want different results, don't always do the same things. Prizes cap costs, and cost taxpayers nothing if they're not won. Perhaps you fear (as is evidenced by your occasional use of the word hack) that I hope prizes can be used to CANCEL endeavors of the federal government that I don't want funded anyway. I think I addressed that point above, though. I want MOST of the federal government's expenditures to be for scientific research...but through the offering of competitive prizes.

Money's not easy to obtain, admittedly, but prize offerings are the first step towards pressuring the feds into finally giving tax incentives to pioneering industries. That combination, along with others (such as deregulation and stronger intellectual property rights lasting for more time, as well as the long overdue recognition of private property rights in space) could yield a winning combination that we still lack.

So you don't think any area of your particular niche could successfully lend itself to prizes? Your experience is superior to mine regarding trying to get funding for ventures and projects in your particular niche. I still think it's a leap to say that just because YOU and your cadre couldn't pull it off, nobody could. You MIGHT be right, but I hope you aren't. But what do I know. Let's see, I'm a....twit, t*rd, and some of those other unmentionables that you love calling me. Only now are you starting to rationally justify it. Perhaps guaranteed loans for prize contestants is an additional approach worth considering. Anyhow, please thank your pharmacist for me.