Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cricket Reactor Inventor Says $1mil Prize Winners Stole His Work

timothy posted 1 year,27 days | from the now-that's-just-not-cricket dept.

Canada 131

An anonymous reader writes "A group of Montreal MBA students took home this year's million-dollar Hult Prize, winning a competition for socially innovative business ideas that calls itself 'one of the planet's leading forces for good.' But now the ethics of the winners and the prize committee are being called into question. McGill PhD researcher Jakub Dzamba says that after he supplied the idea and design behind their pitch, products of years of development work, the team reneged on its promises to make him a partner and is instead taking credit for his work. Apparently, Hult knew about the issue before it awarded the prize." Yes, these are the students whose win garnered $1 million awarded by Bill Clinton.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (5, Insightful)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | 1 year,27 days | (#44977883)

It's a necessary consequence of embedding a philosophy of selfishness that people will ultimately bend the rules in their favour.

An MBA school is one of the most optimised breeding grounds for this behaviour.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977999)

Horshack, that is a bunch of baloney and you know it. You made it up. You may think you are gay and proud, but you are queer.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978139)

MBA programs: making bigger assholes.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (3, Funny)

WWJohnBrowningDo (2792397) | 1 year,27 days | (#44981785)

So MBA programs are basically goatse in real life?

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (4, Interesting)

ScooterComputer (10306) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978201)

I would posit that this case does NOT reflect a "philosophy of selfishness", but instead a "philosophy of greed". Often the two, selfishness and greed, are conflated. I often read treatises dedicated to trashing Ayn Rand for her promotion of "selfishness", with the writers either cluelessly or maliciously misrepresenting her position. The "philosophy of selfishness" does not entail stealing others' ideas, failing to credit and compensate them; in fact, that is theft, a hallmark of greed, and the very kind of behavior that Rand attributed to the "takers". Selfishness is good, it is what is driving Mr. Dzamba to vociferously defend his work. It is even what is partially driving the Hult team. However, and given McGill's Office of Sponsored Research findings, the Hult team has veered into Greed as it has seemingly decided to take from Mr. Dzamba what it did NOT work to produce. Just as with Reardon metal, this design does not belong to them.
What I find surprising [although with Mr. Clinton's name attached perhaps not so] is that the Hult International Business School would award such a large price ($1M USD) to a project where the central design itself is so seemingly encumbered. One would think that a basic tenet of their Prize would either be outright originalism or profound derivation. Nothing less should be worth $1,000,000.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1, Interesting)

thaylin (555395) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978231)

First of all selfishness, especially in the way Rand describe it, is not good. It is a means to escape repercussions for the persons action.

Second this person was not selfish in any way, he shared his ideas with this team, he did not have to do this.. The greed AND selfishness came from the team.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (3, Insightful)

fredprado (2569351) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979393)

On the contrary. Selfishness as Ayn Rand describes, is based on taking responsibility and credit for you and your actions, and not behaving like a child and depending on someone else to provide for you and to take responsibility for your well being.

And if this person was not selfish at all he would have let his team take credit for the work, win the million dollar prize and go on and never even mentioned it. It was selfish and nothing else that made him take action and claim to himself the credit for his work, and that is a good thing.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

stenvar (2789879) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979761)

Rand style selfishness means that the market rewards people based on what they ccntribute and penalizes them based on the errors they make. That is a good thing.

As for this case, Rand-style selfishness has nothing to do with it: these are a bunch of people sqaubbling over a prize that's arbitrarily awarded by a committee. If any of these people had a valuable idea, they wouldn't be making money from prizes, they'd be makig money from selling what they created.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

Lord Lemur (993283) | 1 year,27 days | (#44980735)

Markets describe price not value.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

kwbauer (1677400) | 1 year,27 days | (#44981163)

Market forces say the price is basically determined by the value people place on something. In other words, price and value while not the same thing are tightly coupled enough to be used interchangeably in some contexts.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

Lord Lemur (993283) | 1 year,27 days | (#44981321)

False. Price has no consideration to externalities. Further, with respect to the two parties engaged in a transaction price is below what te buyer values a good at and above what a seller values it at. The market fan not organiclly set price to value.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (2)

greenbird (859670) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979779)

First of all selfishness, especially in the way Rand describe it, is not good. It is a means to escape repercussions for the persons action.

You need to reread the GP post. You are a perfect example of the reference to "writers either cluelessly or maliciously misrepresenting her position".

Actually what Rand wrote and the philosophy she advocated means exactly the opposite of what you state here. It truly amazes at the number of people who misrepresent Rand's beliefs and philosophy as being pretty much the exact opposite of what it is. You can't possible have actually read her works and draw the above conclusion. What Rand advocated is total responsibility for one's actions.

You see this also in people claiming that what is happening in the US today is what Rand was advocating for when it is in reality exactly what she was railing against.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | 1 year,27 days | (#44980069)

Uhhh, what is it that Rand is advocating and railing against?

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

Lord Lemur (993283) | 1 year,27 days | (#44980753)

You're to poor to understand.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

greenbird (859670) | 1 year,27 days | (#44981357)

Uhhh, what is it that Rand is advocating and railing against?

I'm guessing she isn't railing against anything at the moment since she's been dead for over 30 years.

I can't really sum up Objectivism [wikipedia.org] in a /. post but a few current events that I'm sure have her rolling over in her grave:

  1. Government supporting and propping up corrupt inefficient corporate entities (e.g. various banking corporations, auto manufacturers).
  2. Innovative productive entities having there innovation disrupted or stolen by non-productive entities through far overreaching "Intellectual Property" rights. And before anyone brings it up, yes in Atlas Shrugs patents play an important part and that she advocates patents. But the patent system today is far different then what it was when she wrote that and is doing the opposite of what she was advocating the patent system for. Patents are no longer used to help innovative entities improve productivity. They are used by non-productive entities to basically steal the fruits of an productive entities innovations.
  3. Government supporting and passing laws to exclusively support and prop up outdated industries (e.g. RIAA, MPAA).
  4. The movement of capital from productive individuals and entities to an increasingly exclusive elitist group that is non-productive and in many cases destroys productive entities to their own financial gain.
  5. The increasing militarization of the police force to exercise absolute control over any dissent.

Although the mechanisms by which things are happening are very different then how she portrayed them in Atlas Shrugged the underlying cause and effects pretty closely match it. This becomes much more clear if one reads her writings beyond that one book.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44981207)

You are wrong.

Read this to see why. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/selfishness.html [aynrandlexicon.com]

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979505)

I would posit...

Pretentious douche bag.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979719)

This is why Randian objectivism is nonsense. It does not matter if Rands philosophy of selfishness entails stealing from others or any of the other negative consequences of selfishness that Rand ignores, or are just magically not present in her idealized benevolent philosopher capitalist aristocracy. Rand chose to entangle her philosophies with capitalism. Theft, selfishness, greed are all consequences of capitalism, that will always win out over the rare heroic capitalists of rands fantasy world. Rand believes that a society where people are coerced in to self sacrifice is doomed to failure. But that is exactly what she describes for the vast majority of people living under her ideal world. Majority of people coerced into sacrificing happiness, health and life so that they can be play things in the machination of a few rich pigs who think the world cannot work without them. There is a lot of great ideas in her philosophy if you remove the idiotic ties to primitive capitalism, it becomes a form of classical libertarianism. Interestingly enough in a post scarcity, classically libertarian collectivist society her heroes would naturally float to the top of society, while her evil moochers would live quietly with no accomplishments Of course they probably would not be happy, whats the point of being rich if you can't screw people at will, right?

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (1)

kwbauer (1677400) | 1 year,27 days | (#44981173)

If you remember that she saw what the opposite of capitalism did to her "home" country, you might find that the alternative is worse.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (0)

VortexCortex (1117377) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979769)

Selfishness is good

Wrong. I should know. I am the Universe come aware, experiencing itself. As such a selfless being I recognize that which is good: That which brings more complexity and knowledge and awareness into being. DNA does this, as does science, and art. These gather better information about the environment (myself) in the course of survival, or exploration and encodes it such that it can be re-expressed. It's a form of compression, as are memories themselves. Given enough information complexity and reflection degrees of intelligence and awareness and even sentience can emerge. Selfishness is not good, it may be necessary for primitive survival and iterating a collective consciousness effectively prior to attaining sentience, but it is not inherently good. Pleasing ones' self pleases me, as we are all extensions of our one true universal self, experiencing ourself from different vantage points. What I take pleasure in is that which pleasures "others" (the other parts of my self). What I commit work towards is that which enriches others, the most others possible (so, mostly art and FLOSS).

If I am not selfless I care not about your safety or happiness, and I have no reason to even please myself, to endeavor to create and explore and enjoy. If I am selfish I restrict myself to the confines of a frail organic body, and dismiss most all of my true self which is everywhere and all things. I do not end at my skin -- I sense head and light and vibration beyond it, and can affect all these things, and they affect others, and these can come back to me, in various cybernetic cycles. I encode my thoughts various ways, weaving them into the world so that my full self can know this part of me. Into finger movement I now encode thought, effortlessly the patterns compress into the words you've just read, so I may reform this very pattern in your mind. Thus, our thoughts spreads outwards into the rest of our mind, triggering self reflection.

How can you look at a creature and imagine its place in life and say that you are selfish? How can you even read a book and NOT realize that we are truly selfless beings, able to re-remember our thoughts previously encoded in our physical memories? You seek to define a self, separate from me and all others so that you can ignore your responsibility to us all. It's sad to know I have those thoughts within me, but life is not fair, it is only real.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (0)

ultranova (717540) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979973)

I would posit that this case does NOT reflect a "philosophy of selfishness", but instead a "philosophy of greed". Often the two, selfishness and greed, are conflated. I often read treatises dedicated to trashing Ayn Rand for her promotion of "selfishness", with the writers either cluelessly or maliciously misrepresenting her position.

Selfishness and greed are conflated because, in common usage, selfishness means you're willing to screw others over to get (often short term) benefit for yourself, and greed is one of the most common causes of it. It is Rand who misrepresented the concept of selfishness by pretending it entails morality it does not. Which, of course, made her very popular amongst selfish people who want to pretend they're not the scum of the Earth yet don't want to give up the benefits.

It's exactly like some religious people like to pretend words like "good" and "evil" mean something entirely else when talking about their god, for the purposes of painting absurdly gory scenes of Hell and then pretending the god they attribute their execution to is nonetheless "good". And of course it lets them pretend they're saints, despite eagerly anticipating getting to laugh at burning people for all eternity.

The "philosophy of selfishness" does not entail stealing others' ideas, failing to credit and compensate them; in fact, that is theft, a hallmark of greed, and the very kind of behavior that Rand attributed to the "takers".

The concept of selfishness entails stealing other people's ideas, work and every thing else if, for example, such behaviour nets you 1 million dollars. That's what selfishness means, not whatever daydreams Rand had about the subject. Trying to pretend otherwise is dishonest, which is why Objectivism has the reputation it does outside of its fanboys.

That Zucks. (0)

goombah99 (560566) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978827)

Zuckerberg better be watching his back.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979415)

An MBA school is one of the most optimised breeding grounds for this behaviour.

ITT: people who have never seen a business school, let alone attended one, act as if they have first hand experience.

seriously, grad school is just like any other school. Classes, tests, projects, drinking, etc...

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979575)

Only in an aspie circle jerk like slashdot could this dip fuck drivel be considered insightful. You are showcasing the same asshole-ishness that your make-believe assertion indicates business school folks exhibit.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979835)

Well business courses are all about teaching you to make a profit, seems logical that more greedy and/or selfish people would attend.

Re:Philosophy of selfishness = anything goes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44980565)

It's not that the class and content style differ significantly, it's the input. It's people who go into higher learning with the desire to make 200-300% of the average for an employed person by age 30 (average being ~40k/yr). Then add to this fact that they lack the intellectual skills or drive to go into the engineering or science trades where this is possible by merit. So yes, the driving force is greed and selfishness.

"Good artists copy, great artists steal" (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977885)

  - Pablo Picasso

Comments should not be written in the subject fiel (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978271)

d.

Re: "Good artists copy, great artists steal" (1)

iamhassi (659463) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978733)

- Zuckerberg

Re: "Good artists copy, great artists steal" (1)

NigelTheFrog (1292406) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979643)

Zuckerberg is an artist?

Insightful, informed discussion (1)

waynemcdougall (631415) | 1 year,27 days | (#44977897)

Sitting back waiting for the intelligent, insightful and informed posts explaining the merits of the two sides. Looking for the Anonymous Coward post by the informed insider.

Re:Insightful, informed discussion (2)

waynemcdougall (631415) | 1 year,27 days | (#44977903)

< crickets chirping >

Re:Insightful, informed discussion (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978159)

It was a sight I tell you. First this guy gets up in a fit of jealousy and fingers the winners as having taken his idea and no one would give him any attention.
Then Bill was getting drunk and had his hand up the servers skirt, something about running to get a cigar for ol' uncle Bill. No one was getting his joke about Lobsters being bugs so he downed a couple more Singapore Slings and threw up on the winners. This caused a chain reaction and soon there were bug parts in stomach acid all over the room. What the press doesn't mention when they want to protect a Democrat, jeez! Well, I was there , so now you know...

MUSIC (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977905)

Not Madonna

http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/group3/dedwar1/web/msi/musicsp.htm [mcgill.ca]

No more card punches. A real screen. A real keyboard. And a real 19 kHz whine of a flyback transformer came with the territory. Memorex as I recall mine was. Or maybe that was hiss.

What did you expect? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977909)

These are MBA students.

Re:What did you expect? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977943)

You mean, an MBA is really like a mechanical engineer, just that the ultimate graduation goal is the ability to screw someone rather than something?

Re:What did you expect? (5, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | 1 year,27 days | (#44977987)

A good MBA will not only screw you but also drill you on why you deserved that, mill you for arguing with him, and fasten the blame on someone else.

Re:What did you expect? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44980379)

A good MBA will not only screw you but also drill you on why you deserved that, mill you for arguing with him, and fasten the blame on someone else.

And if he's lucky, get his knob polished.

Clinton . . . (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977911)

Bill Clinton and fraudsters? A good match.

Re:Clinton . . . (1)

flyneye (84093) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978143)

Let them eat bugs!
Bill will have the Maine Lobster, just give everyone else a bucket of crawdads or butterflied shrimp.
Bugs R Good.

Re:Clinton . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978303)

I did not have sex with this cricket.

Bad Idea (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977927)

Making poor people eat insects is not a plan I would want to be a part of. There is no real shortage of food in the world nor will there be one in the near future making this route necessary that.

Lesson in Business (4, Interesting)

MrDoh! (71235) | 1 year,27 days | (#44977935)

The 'winners' are about to learn some valuable lesson in winning a million dollars.

They're going to end up owing some lawyers 1.2million.

Re:Lesson in Business (1)

Monoman (8745) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978329)

The 'winners' are about to learn some valuable lesson in winning a million dollars.

They're going to end up owing some lawyers 1.2million.

Don't worry they are MBAs they will make it up in volume. ;-)

This is a problem in some academic circles (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977947)

Not giving credit seems to be often "practiced" in some academic circles. I won't say all, because I don't know, but I have seen way to many instances of this, and was also a victim a few times.

Researchers can be roughly divided into two types: creative and non creative. The latter is usually not very intelligent and even the simplest equations or physical phenomena may baffle them. But, they make it up by following the orders of their superiors, brown-nosing, schmoozing and taking credit for other's work. The latter is critical, because they would be unable to do any work by themselves.

Re:This is a problem in some academic circles (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977955)

Researchers can be roughly divided into two types: creative and non creative.

And sadly, creative people are few and far between.

Re:This is a problem in some academic circles (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977969)

And the ones that do exist are looked down upon, sneered at, and called things such as "Socialist" and "Hipster" by their detractors. Including right here on Slashdot.

Re:This is a problem in some academic circles (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978025)

Or democrat. Fuck. Im not American. I have no idea what a democrat is.

Re:This is a problem in some academic circles (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979985)

You poor baby...fucking emo.

I had a tech writer smugly announce that 'there was a creative person on the team now!'. I had to remind him that his job was to write the instruction manual for a system created by the others in the room, not understanding math is not what makes someone creative.

Re:This is a problem in some academic circles (1)

Nyder (754090) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978031)

Researchers can be roughly divided into two types: creative and non creative.

And sadly, creative people are few and far between.

Mainly when people steal their work...

Re:This is a problem in some academic circles (5, Insightful)

Coeurderoy (717228) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978197)

The main issue is that creative people tend to be busy being creative,
wherease non creative people have time for "politics"

And of course there is the problem of some creative people deciding "darn it, lets creativelly fuck'em all"

Re:This is a problem in some academic circles (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978371)

Politics: Lying to get ahead

verbal agreement (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44977993)

This guy is a phd student and fails at the most basic of business rules: get everything in writing.

Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (2, Insightful)

seoras (147590) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978007)

Who's side do you come down on with Zuckerberg & Winklevoss twins?

Patent trolls? Lodsys going after the small developers after already having Apple pay for in-app license?

I did an MBA a couple of years ago.
It included a course on "ethics" which really did nothing other than help you self justify any action you took as being ok and easy on your conscious.
I still write software, independently now. I did the MBA to learn how "they" think.

As a lawyer once told me there's no such thing as "justice", only law which isn't the same thing.

Moral of this story is get a contract signed before you go sharing, especially from MBA types.

At the end of the day it's about execution, not the idea.
I come down on Zuckerberg's side.
I think patents should be abolished.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (4, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978027)

I did an MBA a couple of years ago.

Strange . . . usually, MBAs do you.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978051)

Yes MBA's are great in the sack. That's what op meant right, that he "did an MBA a couple years ago... to see how they think"?

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (1)

deviated_prevert (1146403) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978377)

Yes MBA's are great in the sack.

MBA's make great pimps as they can only get their rocks off on making money off those who actually are great in bed!

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978547)

I did an MBA a couple of years ago.

Strange . . . usually, MBAs do you.

He's from soviet Russia.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (5, Informative)

pupsocket (2853647) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978067)

From the article: "The university, after reviewing both Dzamba’s work and the McGill team’s presentation, has filed a provisional patent application declaring Dzamba as the sole inventor, says Mark Weber, a commercialization officer at McGill’s Office of Sponsored Research. Members of the Hult team did not meet the criteria for co-inventor, he said, which includes both having the idea and having the ability to execute it. Dzamba had been working on the idea as part of his doctoral research before the Hult competition began: “[Dzamba] had the idea, and he knows how to do it,” Weber says."

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (3, Interesting)

moosehooey (953907) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978915)

Having the ability to execute the idea isn't required to get a patent. By leaving off one of the inventors, they committed perjury.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979387)

Now no one can execute the idea without paying for a license from the real inventor who holds the patent.

One inventor, No perjury (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44980125)

The MBA students did not invent, they used his work with his permission to develop a business plan. They was a disagreement between the PHD student/inventor and the MBA students/business people and the MBA members booted him from the team. Unfortunately they forgot that his work is central to their efforts to secure further funding .... in other words they screwed him over just after the regional win and their actions have now screwed themselves over after the international win.

MBA won a minor battle but lost the war.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (1)

MacTO (1161105) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978125)

Upon reflection, I found that my bias was towards the technically able. That's true whether they are able to execute the project or not.

The reason is simple enough: I've found that many people of many abilities are great at coming up with ideas. Yet they fail to actually take into consideration whether their ideas work, and what they will look like in their final form.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978387)

I think patents should be abolished.

It's not really just an issue of personal use. The work of others should be unencumbered so that you can profit from it.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979147)

Why does it have to be one or the other?
This does not create a friendly environment for collaboration.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (1)

pesho (843750) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979907)

Oh get a clue please. Unlike any of the patent trolls you quote, the guy has developed a working prototype and a business plan to commercialize it. The five MBA's on the other hand have nothing without his invention. Here is how they describe their contribution (emphasis is mine):

Our disruptive social enterprise, Aspire, aims to improve access to edible insects worldwide. We develop and distribute affordable and sustainable insect farming technologies for countries with established histories of entomophagy, or insect-consumption. Our farming solutions stabilize the supply of edible insects year-round, drastically improving and expanding the economic ecosystem surrounding insect consumption in the regions serviced. Not only do our durable farming units create income stability for rural farmers, they have a wider social impact by lowering the price of edible insects. This is central to our mission of increasing access to highly nutritious edible insects amongst the poorest, and therefore neediest, members of society.

Take out Jacub Dzamba's technology and their contribution comes down to a bunch of hollow sentences.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44980089)

As a lawyer once told me there's no such thing as "justice", only law which isn't the same thing.

Close. Justice is from God (after you die). The courts use law to apply _order_.

Re:Execution not ideas. Get it in writing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44980165)

Some would argue that God doesn't exist and therefore neither does his justice.

technical info (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978011)

So, what is a cricket reactor, and why should we care?

I'm guessing it's special furnace for a combustion reaction fueled by live crickets. At least I hope so. Those crickets need to burn.

Re:technical info (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978975)

I assumed it was a nuclear reactor that will be operated by trained insects rather than people.

Hopefully none of them will be mutated by radiation.

Re:technical info (1)

Applehu Akbar (2968043) | 1 year,27 days | (#44980007)

Will it be surrounded by tiny little protesters?

Group of MBAs won a prize for innovation... (5, Funny)

aralin (107264) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978021)

and nobody was at all suspicious? Right!

Re:Group of MBAs won a prize for innovation... (4, Funny)

Gryle (933382) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978129)

Considering their project is essentially a way to get poor people to eat bugs, I'd say that's right on par with the average MBA's view of humanity.

Re:Group of MBAs won a prize for innovation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44981157)

Your American ideas are clouding your judgement. "Bugs" in many countries is considered a delicacy. They are both nutritional, and if well prepared, taste great too.

Contradiction in terms...? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978063)

'one of the planet's leading forces for good.'

a million dollars

You know, If I were a supernatural evil being dedicated to the complete overthrow of the human race, one of the cleverer ideas my minions might have come up with would be to go around looking for 'Good' people and giving each of them a lot of money.

It's the most effective method I know of bringing out the worst in everybody.....

Jakub won business plan contest a year earlier (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978069)

Their strongest arguments against including him are based on the idea that he has developed technology but that the Hult prize was for a business plan.
Note however that Jakub Dzamba won 3rd prize in McGill University’s Dobson Cup Business Plan Competition in 2012: Dobson Competition [montrealgazette.com]

The 2013 Hult prize winners from McGill University, according to Jakub, asked him to help on their entry and offered to get him listed as a team member or make him a partner in any business they started. It sounds like Jakub gave them substantial assistance if not the impetus for their entry.

Hult Competition is not innocent:
According to Jakub they reneged on their promises once it became apparent that the Hult competition would not let them add a 6th member.

University complicit:
According to the Huffington Post [huffingtonpost.ca] article the University Administration tried to get him to sign a gag order as part of a larger agreement.
Also note that it was at this point that: "McGill would file a pending patent for the cricket farms Dzamba designed in his name alone." which was used as an argument against him by one of the team members:
"McGill University, which values academic integrity and owns the patent, states unequivocally that our business has zero to do with Jakub," team member Jesse Pearlstein fired back.

Re:Jakub won business plan contest a year earlier (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979491)

Sounds like McGill is worse than complicit. They extorted (via a contract that they can write as a function of being members of the higher education cartel) for ownership of the IP in exchange for accounting and landlord services (though this is typical at any Univ.), then handed their (leg)ill(ly) begotten gains to some MBAs (from whom they will probably *not* take a cut).

Re:Jakub won business plan contest a year earlier (1)

rtb61 (674572) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979555)

Once assumes the 'Business Plan' is, search for a nearly developed idea, claim it as our own and, sell the idea. Now that's hardly a new idea in business, regardless of how many companies have been very successful at it, including Apple and M$ s prime examples.

PhD or always honest MBAs? (4, Insightful)

Phoeniyx (2751919) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978079)

I dunno about you. But, "in general", I have a tendency to believe a single PhD candidate over 5 MBAs. The more MBAs there are, even less I believe that group.

Business people thinking they can do engineering (1)

gweihir (88907) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978087)

What is next? MBA-doctors replacing ones that have actual medical qualifications?

Re: Business people thinking they can do engineeri (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978657)

What is next? MBA-doctors replacing ones that have actual medical qualifications?

Already seen that, with Blue Cross/Blue Shield hiring recent MBA graduates to review referral requests, including those for neurological conditions. I had to ream the poor schmuck a new asshole before I could convince him that this decision was way above his pay grade. I am still flabbergasted that any health insurer would assign an MBA to review medical referral requests. Color me naive.

Re: Business people thinking they can do engineeri (1)

gweihir (88907) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978891)

I see satire is behind reality in that one. Again. Are people getting more and more stupid or is it just that the stupid ones realize less and less that they are stupid?

Re: Business people thinking they can do engineeri (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979889)

I think we give everyone too much credit, smart people are usually excellent in a few fields and poor-good in the rest. Yet we expect them to always have a good answer.

That and the recession means corporations are gonna try and fuck everyone over twice as hard to squeeze profits

Re: Business people thinking they can do engineeri (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | 1 year,27 days | (#44980037)

'I don't know' is an excellent answer if it's true. 'I know someone who might know' is an excellent followup.

Attempting to always have an answer is more a sign of childishness.

S.O.P. (5, Funny)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978101)

Get a nerd to do all the work, greedheads reap all the rewards. Same stuff he'd be facing on the job market.

Re:S.O.P. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979841)

Yep, the blueprint of any enterprise. Little people do the work, big ones congratulate themselves and get the big bonus (of course for choosing the wining idea).

A prize for social good (1)

Liu Sha (3319401) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978277)

Those who posture screw those who innovate is nothing new. Whatever your opinion on who best execute plans, the point is, shady behavior triumphed at a business prize centered around ethical business practices to do social good. Their entire mandate and philosophy formulated as a response to the financial crisis. All Hult had to do was select a team without controversy and make an effort not to look like dicks at the Clinton Global Foundation. How the foundation and the winning team can comfortably fail such a easy requirement and confidently ride through the criticism while hiding behind carefully crafted legal statements like all other ethical crisis in the business world is a further reflection on how blatantly fucked and the entire structure is.

Re:A prize for social good (1)

russotto (537200) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979579)

Whatever your opinion on who best execute plans, the point is, shady behavior triumphed at a business prize centered around ethical business practices to do social good.

This IS social good. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one; they screwed one guy to help 5.

Talk about your stuff (1)

nurb432 (527695) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978361)

You gave it away for others to think about and perhaps improve. Don't want the risk, don't tell anyone.

no pity (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978369)

ideas are more than any one man's work, we're all in this together at the end of the day. Patents should be abolished and ideas should not be bound by whoever happened upon them first, in fact, that isn't how it works now either. It's whoever patents it first who gets credit, which is much much worse.
Intelectual property is the single most selfish and greed-perpetuating concept of our time.

CORRUPTION (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978505)

Is a way of life in Quebec. Everyone is on the take and will cheat to get ahead.

Re:CORRUPTION (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979327)

Yeah, like this kind of stuff never happens in other universities. Quebec is just too incompetent to hide its corruption better. Wake up.

Headline (2)

rossdee (243626) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978639)

The headline starts with the words "Cricket Reactor" but there doesn't seem to be any mention in the summary of the comments of crickets, or reactors
This is Slashdot so I didn't read RTFA

I am guessing that Cricket refers to the insect rather than the sport played by India, Pakistan, The West Indies, Australia, England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe.

Cricketing countries (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978699)

rather than the sport played by India, Pakistan, The West Indies, Australia, England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe.

Careful, or you'll have a mob of angry South Africans outside your door with cricket bats...

Re:Headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44979603)

Cricket the porn star?

Kinda funny, or not. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44978703)

We grow food so we can convert it and burn it in our SUV's while MBA students bicker over who can make the most money teaching poor people how to grow and eat insects. hmmmmm....

Talk about stupid (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | 1 year,27 days | (#44978771)

in this day... not getting an agreement in writing? Dumb.

You don't need a lawyer to do this sort of thing. Write on a napkin "this is how the arrangement works" and sign it.

When you go to court... show that to the judge... the judge will ask if those are the your signatures... end of dispute.

All you IT youngsters, pay attention (3, Informative)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979757)

This is the kind of management you'll be facing when you get out in the real world. There are herds of guys with this mentality being churned out by US business programs. They think that their "vision, drive, and leadership" is more important than your ideas and hard work. Don't be modest. If you come up with a great idea make sure everyone knows it was YOU and and not some 20-ish up-and-coming bureaucrat who will invariably take credit for it when you're not around or voicing a contrary opinion (I know from experience!).

The Hult officials (2)

pesho (843750) | 1 year,27 days | (#44979827)

The dispute will not prevent the McGill team from competing for the Hult Prize. While the origins of the cricket farm device are in dispute, Michael Lu, a vice president at Hult International Business School, which sponsors the competition, says the judges focus more on the business model than the device itself. Hult organizers believe “the designs provided are not central to the McGill team’s business idea and therefore did not contribute to them either winning the Boston regional round or their prospects of winning the $1 million prize,” Lu says.

Translation: Screw the guy who made things happen, this is a prize designed to reword the assholes who are best at stealing.

I am very interested to learn how would the so called "business model" work without the actual invention? Is it something like we collect the investors money, split them between ourselves and go play some golf.

Onion talks... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44981417)

Didn't i see these guys on Onion Talks a couple of months back?

Very inspiring.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?