I agree that unrealistic projects have long time horizons. They ALSO require lots of people and capital. Starting a NEW, long-term project is NOT a task cut out for a young person--you need connections and experience for it to have a good chance of succeeding.
The candidates who want to work towards these unrealistic goals SHOULD--but they should do so in a way that is more likely to succeed. In this case, a better use of the person and $100K would be giving him a job at SpaceX (which Thiel is an investor in), and using the $100K to hire another person there too :)
Also, it's funny that you mention that other quote. Am I the only one that reads that and sees a contradiction? You cant fight the problem of "oh no researchers aren't thinking long-term enough" by telling them to "bring technologies out of the lab and into the market sooner..." I understand what she's trying to do, it's just written strangely.
I understand your confusion re the seeming contradiction re Laura Deming's desire to promote a long-term research orientation vs getting technologies out of the lab and into the market sooner. I know Laura very well. Do not bet against her. Ever. Look up "implacable" or "relentless" in any dictionary and that's her.
She has developed a pragmatic strategy to change the entire way we fund scientific research. There's a reason for the seeming contradiction that can be easily explained to anyone who understands how markets work. I can't go ...
http://thielfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=19
Thoughts?
A lot of Thiel's beliefs are in line with those of a significant portion of the LessWrong community, so I trust his judgment more than I trust that of most.