Tom J. Pandolfi

Twitter / GitHub / Essays

Hypothesis for the hackathon

The original thesis behind this hackathon is simple: can students achieve progress in science through competitive hackathons ?

Outside of computer science, progress in natural sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Biology, etc.) has significantly slowed down since the 1970s. If you’d like to learn more about this stagnation, read: Where is My Flying Car , The Great Stagnation , Scientific Freedom , Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find .

For some authors, this slow down in natural sciences is due to academia’s broader hijacking by social sciences departments. Others believe it’s due to over-regulation, over-centralisation or poor economic incentives. The Unabomber even took this stagnation to mean we are at the end of history.

Whatever the true source of the problem, it’s clear we will need to come up with alternative routes to achieve scientific progress, aided by a largely unregulated, mostly decentralised tool, with uniquely great economic incentives called technology. These qualities especially apply to software and information technology, however hardware and manufacturing will also play an important role in the success of this tech enabled science.

Data science competitions and software hackathons offer a format with the largest surface area for potential solutions to be discovered, and are incentivised to have low barriers to entry.

Can the challenges scientists face be the subject of tech competitions ? Are open competitions an effective way to take on these technical challenges ? Can open-source accelerate research, so that “no problem has to be solved twice” ? Are students good enough to be part of the solution ?

The first hackathon focuses exclusively on longevity, as the barrier to entry for life sciences and biology seems to be lower than physics and chemistry. If the thesis is proven to be correct, we will continue organising similar hackathons throughout the world and collaborate with researchers to address the obstacles they face. If the thesis is incorrect, then we will continue to iterate towards a solution.

Thank you for being a part of this experiment, and good luck.

- Tom