Abstract
Hardware, systems and algorithms research communities have historically haddifferent incentive structures and fluctuating motivation to engage with eachother explicitly. This historical treatment is odd given that hardware andsoftware have frequently determined which research ideas succeed (and fail).This essay introduces the term hardware lottery to describe when a researchidea wins because it is suited to the available software and hardware and notbecause the idea is superior to alternative research directions. Examples fromearly computer science history illustrate how hardware lotteries can delayresearch progress by casting successful ideas as failures. These lessons areparticularly salient given the advent of domain specialized hardware whichmakes it increasingly costly to stray off of the beaten path of research ideas.