Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 562 posts

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#361

Post by Zigurd »

bogwog wrote: post #350

Anyone else find it ironic that Google is the subject of one of the biggest anti-trust cases in recent history, and now Schmidt is blaming the US for not innovating enough? Maybe if so much of the tech industry's wealth and resources weren't pooled together into a handful of massive monopolists who have nearly complete control over whether any competitor lives or dies, the US (and really, the entire world) would have…

That may be true but it does not address the kinds of large-scale, national policy issues Schmidt is talking about. We have lost our way in technology strategy. Instead of welcoming foreign students we chase them away. Instead of integrating tech markets globally to extend our soft power, we practice knee jerk techno-nationalism. It is not even done competently. The "advisors" pushing these policies are known for being cranks. The utter mess that is the TikTok forced sale highlights that we do not have policy as much as we have bad improvisation around spastic uninformed actions.

We have always had seemingly invulnerable dominant tech companies. Remember Intel? Their dominance was seen as holding down chip innovation, but it was also an instrument of American soft power. The latter is what Schmidt is talking about.

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#362

Post by 0xfaded »

pmachinery wrote: post #326
0xfaded wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of cultural unity thing is a curtain to hide behind. There's no reason Europe can't have a powerful federal government, other than it would result in transfers from the "export based economies" to the others.

The reason Europe can't have a powerful federal government is that most people in Europe quite rightly don't want one.

This is obviously a massive topic, but from my vantage as a foreigner living in Europe is that Europe already has (and pays for) all features of a federal government with two exceptions.

* Responsibility to implement treaties remains with the individual members. * No ability to tax or set fiscal policy.

The advantage of a single set of laws is obvious. For starters I wouldn't be spending my Sunday reading a 500 page document on minor items describing how Denmark's implementation of an EU treaty differs from the treaty's wording. (Although it would cost the jobs of the people who produce such documents, and as such would fly in the face of the one central pillar of paneuropean identity).

The ability to tax and set fiscal policy is needed to offset the imbalance created by the single currency. Another lengthy topic, but basically the assumption that every EU member should "export" is simply impossible. A normal currency system would correct a trade imbalance automatically. The euro systematically undervalues the cost of German output buy forcing their European neighbors to transact in the same currency.

And then you have mafias, bankers, tax havens, uneven social nets, and a raft of other social problems that can only effectively be dealt with by a central government. The irony should not be lost that the American government has had better success battling the Italian mafia than the Italians have.

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#363

Post by bepvte »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #359
bogwog wrote: post #350

Anyone else find it ironic that Google is the subject of one of the biggest anti-trust cases in recent history, and now Schmidt is blaming the US for not innovating enough? Maybe if so much of the tech industry's wealth and resources weren't pooled together into a handful of massive monopolists who have nearly complete control over whether any competitor lives or dies, the US (and really, the entire world) would have…

Google definitely could of created a research laboratory. Wasnt it not long ago that companies would invest a lot more money on research? That was why we got so many impressive projects out of Bell Labs and I am sure other companies. Its a shame that horse race ended. Whats worse is Google wants all their software to be as intangible as possible by forcing it all on their servers. Google hasnt had many desktop apps y…

https://research.google/

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#364

Post by Zigurd »

koyote wrote: post #314
Aerroon wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more of a case of "most electronics and everything that runs on it is not made in Europe". I'm a European posting on an American company's forum using a browser made in the US running on an operating system made by an American company running on a phone designed and built in China with components made in a variety of countries that aren't in Europe. The same goes for using a desktop PC. Even most of the…

Your phone's CPU was designed in the UK! (alas Arm are now owned by a Japanese company)

Actually it originated in a joint venture of Apple, VLSI Technology, and Acorn.

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#365

Post by nicoburns »

realityking wrote: post #322
ainiriand wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux was developed by finnish guy and the www protocol was developed by a brit.

Interesting that you picked two examples where the innovation wasn’t commercialized and the innovator did not become rich. I suspect there‘s some cultural aspect to that.

IMO this is a big difference: I'd actually feel quit bad about becoming rich off th back oef a technology or innovation that I could have made more open and widely available.

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#366

Post by eternalban »

Erich Schmidt and BBC are dog whistling.

What the Western elites envy, the "dropped ball" and "innovation", is the CCP's "AI" assisted total grip on the Chinese society. It is true: CCP is free of ethical and moral considerations that we have been told for generations are 'foundational' to Western civilization, and thus has been free to "innovate" and materialize Big Brother with Chinese Characteristics.

We could be having an honest debate about the merits of (apparently now legacy) moral and ethical guidelines that supposedly shaped our society, and whether these foundational principles are in fact a "hinderance" to "innovation" and "progress". Two centuries of exceptional development in the West seem to indicate otherwise, but apparently the control freaks behind "Alphabet" are not convinced.

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#367

Post by nine_zeros »

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #336
gigatexal wrote: post #230

Xenophobia and nationalism sure don't help. We used to import the smartest most capable people from all across the world to develop and market their inventions and ideas and maybe even become rich in the process. Now, not so much.

> Xenophobia and nationalism sure don't help. But somehow China a country with even more Xenophobia and nationalism is catching up to us. And the U.S. used to have more Xenophobia and nationalism in the past and was also substantially more innovative. Maybe the real problem is that the U.S. (all the way up to the top) has become anti-intellectual. We have completely dumbed down our culture so that children today want…

But Chinese xenophobia is not American style. Sure they lack immigration but so many Chinese travel outside for education and business that they are in fact hyper aware of cultural differences and are upskilling themselves en masse in dealing with various cultures. They bring that skill back home to build companies and sub cultures that ape the best of other countries.

This is very unlike US style xenophobia where Murica number 1 and anything about foreigners sucks.

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#368

Post by phreeza »

justcomments12 wrote: post #254
phreeza wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation needed.

Effects of botnet in practice: https://imgur.com/mfFRgVj Citations: https://support.google.com/webmasters/thread/36048251?hl=en https://www.reddit.com/r/SEO/comments/fuf3gz/got_hundreds_of... https://old.reddit.com/r/SEO/comments/f798iu/getting_spammed... https://old.reddit.com/r/SEO/comments/ecokzw/i_am_getting_ba...

Of course there are link farms etc, but that doesn't mean the "Google search is controlled by large (Chinese) botnets". That's like saying email is controlled by spammers. There are countermeasures.

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#369

Post by fouc »

chrischen wrote: post #318
fvdessen wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was still not that long ago an incredible amount of innovative companies and products in Europe. But at that time companies were still built for their home markets first and on that regard the USA is big and unified. Since software is mostly winner takes all it means that when the USA companies came to Europe they had already won the USA and could steamroll the local competition There is for example no way a sw…

China’s protectionism is fairly blatant, but Japan also engages in some aggressive protectionism as well.

Japan has a firewall?

Re: Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation

#370

Post by Zigurd »

softwaredoug wrote: post #24

Why do we persist in this old fashioned notion that Nation States are the axis on which “innovation” turns? The brainpower, resources, and motivation for innovating increasingly lie with huge multinational tech companies, not nation states. And they largely don’t care where you live - if you’re smart they want to hire you (unlike nation states with their Byzantine immigration policies)

Of course nation states are not the determinant of technology outcomes. There are plenty of examples of failed initiatives. Remember "fifth generation computing?" But national soft power in chips, aviation, biotech, etc. is very real. Screwing that up is bad.
Post reply on HN