What you'd build if you had 100 millions?

17 points by AlexTheFounder ↗ HN
Imagine that you were approached by a kind person who offered you 100 million dollars to build something of your choice.

This person is very powerful and you cannot possibly cheat, but you don't have to make a profit off your product either.

So, you can take 100 millions and spend your time building something you want. What it would be?

63 comments

[ 7.3 ms ] story [ 137 ms ] thread
I'd build a research institute for mathematics and computer science.

If I had to build something technical, I'd build a secure realtime BSD kernel.

(comment deleted)
A news organization for long-term thinking, reporting and analysis. Essentially a News of the Long Now.
A University strictly dedicated to IT/CS related studies that was actually in it to teach, innovate, and research rather than turn a profit.

And the distance learning department would not use Blackboard, we'd open source our own platform.

I would establish a huge prize for finding the most efficient way to teach the principles of rational thinking and economics to society. And then I'd spend the rest of the money on establishing that teaching method so that everyone can benefit, regardless of prior education or status. This will lead to a better society.
Assuming that there was in fact a 'most efficient' way to teach the principles of rational thinking, how could you confidently identify it?

Makes me think the people most able to teach these principles would rely on them to avoid your contest.

OLPC - only better and completely free.
I read Jared Diamond's book "Collapse" a few years ago and it certainly is a sobering book. I would agree with its thesis that we face a distinct possibility of our high tech "Western" society crashing - and due to the Threads linking us together this crash could be pretty hard.

I would use the 100 million to investigate possible ways of mitigating the effects of such a crash. As the actual causes would be essentially unpredictable I'd pass on that effort and concentrate on what we could do to establish a degree of continuity of core areas of knowledge: maths, medicine, geography etc.

One option would be to build bunkers full of useful books in remote locations (like the gene bank in the Svalbard). However, a better way might be to build a long lasting organisation set apart from our culture - very much like secular versions of medieval monasteries or the mathic concents in Neal Stephenson’s excellent Anathem.

I haven't read Collapse but Albert Wenger from Union Square Ventures had an idea for "black swan philantrophy", which would be "focused on funding projects aimed at preventing or coping with very low probability events that would have cataclysmic outcomes for humanity."

I don't know why threats.org is down at the moment; perhaps it's due to the fact that there weren't that many people willing to actually help with the non-profit a few months ago.

http://continuations.com/post/106672598/looking-for-help-in-...

(comment deleted)
I would build a giant Ark to save us all from 2012 apocalypse, unlike Roland Emmerich who had saved, few of us in his f*ing movie ;)
A million dollars, I could see. I can't imagine what useful thing they could accomplish with 100 million, given that the bottleneck for their avowed program is Friendliness theory. Giving them that much money would distort the organization, probably. Might be counterproductive. :)
I'd build a sustainable commune on a massive scale, using advanced aquaponics, greenhouses, alternative energy sources, and digital information sharing. This would hopefully serve as an example to inspire others to build their own sustainable projects.
Distributed mesh wireless + solar energy.
I'd build a rollercoaster.
Are you serious? You failed your first start-up, how come do you want someone to give you 100 millions.

"This person is very powerful and you cannot possibly cheat"

When the project is big, cheating become easier

"but you don't have to make a profit off your product either"

What's the benefit of your work then?

Judging from my very own current problems, I guess I'd start to support small universities and support promising young students, especially if they study some sort of had science like physics, math, computer science and such.

Such support should include money (well, students need food, books, other equipment depending on the course), but I think it should also include support with various buerocratic problems, like facing the german bafoeg-institute and other buerocrats.

Certainly, it will be hard to actually get a good selection principle going and it also needs a plan to get the money back, but once this is done, I think this is a very valuable thing to invest in. I mean, studying is pretty much a full time job (well, if you study hard to get through the universiy fast, it is), and thus, students usually don't have that much time to work and sometimes they even get to pay for being at the university.

Besides that, I would invest a large sum into neurodermatism research, just for pure egoism. I have this problem, and whoever also has this problem knows how bad this status can be whenever it goes active. (To everyone else: Just imagine the urge to scratch your inner elbow, hand or other inappropiate locations until every skin is gone and just a bloody mess is left. After that, one is depressed, cannot move properly and is in pain.) Thus, this would be a second major investment. I guess it also would not be that egoistic, as a lot of people could benefit from results from this research :)

Prototype vertical farms. It's my new obsession.

The UN projects that arable land will decline to 1/3 acre per person by 2050 (down from 1 acre/person in 1970). I'd buy up a few old mill buildings (they're all over New England, where I live), and convert them to combination indoor farms using hydroponic or aeroponic growing systems, living space (for farmers), and retail space (to sell the food to the community and offer sales space to other local farmers).

I'd use the roof for combination solar, additional green space, and rain catchment.

I second that... I had a similar idea a couple weeks back. bravo!
Move to Detroit. See http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=930868 and http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/aiab0802...

Me and a friend have a half-baked (in more ways than one) idea that it would be fun to move to Detroit and get into aquaculture. It's something we managed to romanticize. Give it some steam-punk marketing aesthetic for giggles.

(I think half the value of HN is being able to browse your old comments to remember where you saw something very interesting.)

Wow, I've been thinking about this a lot. I thought I was the only one :) Although I was kind of thinking a bit larger - building a whole new city within a city - completely self sustaining. With 100M it might be possible :)
I'd invest in 5000 promising new startups.
I would invest it in startups. Which is the best way to foster innovation and job growth.
An extra-solar planet imager (telescope or satellite) and a nuke powered exploration probe to check things out.
$100 million won't do for that.
I would probably start filming low-budget cyberpunk movies for the hardcore viewer, since i don't have to make a profit, a cult-following is the aim. But not the "this movie is so bad its fun" type of cult following, i want the "this movie is really obscure and deep, but still entertaining, too bad none of my friends have herd of it" type. Im aiming at the Nirvana type, not the Johny Mnemonic type of film.If i actually DO make a profit, i might do a steam-punk movie :D I have NO experience or knowledge of movie making, so chances are i will fail and my films would become ideal for bad movie nights.

Alternatively I'll donate the money to someone who can actually use it to make something great.

An accountability website for voting records from city to state to national (in that order given that often enough local legislation has a more direct impact on the average citizen's life than national). The site would cross reference stated platforms of politicians vs their actual voting actions as transparently analyzed by up to 3 university poli sci and history professors one each from conservative / liberal / historial context point of view. The site would also track budgetary spending and hours worked / where worked per politician to provide metrics to the voting populace on who's doing their job, who's doing their job as they said they would.

Primary goal, to provide transparent and neutral public information to voters to enable them to make an actual choice when voting instead of lock stepping according to the current PR spin of any specific party. Secondary goal would be to complement local efforts to increase voting awareness.

Public servants should be under the same metric driven scrutiny by their employers as any other employee for any private company.

Bribe the hell out of an education system (in any bribeable country) to make heavy use of modern psychology, esp. critical reasoning skills.
I would build a gold statue of me
A ~3 ton statue of you.
Gold is dense.
I would Invest all of it in an Alternative Fuel research.
I'd be uncomfortable with 100 million I did not earn. I'd like to think I would say, no thanks. Instead, I would probably come up with some justification for why I am suitable to control this very large investment.

(You could argue that, given luck, a lot of people receive $100 million without really "earning" it. That may be the case, but that would probably make me uncomfortable also. However, as in the previous case, I'd still delude myself into thinking I earned it by foresight, brilliant investment, or mettle.)