Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I worked for a DARPA contractor for years. Nerds all wank over how awesome DARPA is, and how great they are for putting money into all these blue-sky projects that may not pan out, etc. Yet the administration puts some money into technology that doesn't have an immediate benefit in killing people, and people flip their shit.

For context: DARPA has a budget of almost $3 billion. The risk-weighted investment into Solyndra was probably on the order of the low tens of millions.



"The risk-weighted investment into Solyndra was probably on the order of the low tens of millions."

What do you mean by "risk-weighted investment"?

The loan to Solyndra was for $535 million dollars of which practically none was returned [1].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra#Shutdown_and_investiga...


You have to compare apples to apples. DARPA gives out grants. Solyndra was a loan guarantee. The subsidy represented by a loan guarantee is the value of the loan multiplied by the probability of default.


Is their justification for the low risk of default? Such as an overall portfolio where other loan guarantees did not flop?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: