[Drakim]

Your point is good but the direction of your contempt is misplaced. Lottery winners accounts for a tiny fraction of people who have unearned and undeserved wealth, and in terms of how many people they screwed over to get to riches, they are like angels in comparison to other rich people.

[Royi]

I agree with you. I should have made a better choice than lottery. My intention was that the needle which sets the reward for research, long life work pursuing the solution of a problem should move to the right and get those people more.

$3M isn't enough in our days to recognize remarkable work in my opinion. Yes, one of them made a lot of money, but is it true for all the past winners of this prize?

[nightski]

I'm curious, what would be the right amount in your opinion? How would you value it?

[Royi]

That would be interesting data driven research.

I can say something about the effect I want to achieve with the money: recognition and publicity. So the amount of money should make them on front page of many news papers and such. Now from data it might interesting to get the right amount.

I just want the people who make such achievements to be recognized by younger generation.

[nightski]

Not everyone wants those things though. In fact, I could see it being detrimental because then you'd attract a lot of people who only care about those things instead of science itself.

I think we should celebrate scientific achievements as a community. Because the failures are as important as the successes. We shouldn't idolize individuals imho. That is toxic.

[random314]

Alice walton comes to mind

https://www.mic.com/articles/79039/the-untold-story-of-alice...

And let's not talk about the Sacklers