Ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt: US 'dropped the ball' on innovation • Hacker News Board

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

#471

Post by einpoklum » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 4:42 PM UTC

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

... yes, by:

* Letting capital become concentrated to an incredible level, especially in the tech sector.

* Degrading public education through under-funding, privatization (and perhaps problematic pedagogical approaches).

* Allowing infrastructure and welfare services to degrade, contributing to many people being saddled with "life overhead" that inhibits their disposition and availability to innovate technologically.

* Encouraging US residents, in particular students, to become saddled with large amounts of debt.

and I could go on.

Now, it's true that federal and state investment in research has dropped, but Schmidt seems to be focused on getting what amounts to indirect government subsidy for R&D.

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

#472

Post by dna_polymerase » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 4:46 PM UTC

AsyncAwait wrote: post #288

dna_polymerase wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR is the perfect example for OPs point. The whole thing is just stupid, protects nobody and thought millions of people to just click on Okay on any modal they are presented with.

Far from perfect, but if your solution is for companies to self-regulate, I vastly prefer GDPR.

No self-regulation doesn't work, mostly because people do not really care and do not incentivize companies for good behavior.

But the current legislation is spotty as best and doesn't really help, Google and Facebook are still collecting tons of data while SMBs will be the guys who get sued for not complying 100%.

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

#473

Post by missedthecue » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

akiselev wrote: post #187

missedthecue wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any correlation at all between increased school funding and better educational outcomes? For instance, Utah spends $5k per student per year while Baltimore spends $25k per student per year. Utahan children have higher graduation rates, better GPAs, and better standardized test scores. It's the same across the US from NYC to LA. I'm growing more and more skeptical that throwing more and more money into the fu…

According to [1] Utah spends $10,510 per student per year and according to [2] Baltimore spends $16,184. Where did you get your figures? [1] https://auditor.utah.gov/audit_reports/public-education/ [2] https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2019/school-s...

I got it from the Annual Survey of School System Finances, U.S. Census Bureau, though on checking it again it's between $6,000 and $7,000 (I was recalling from memory). So not what I put in my comment exactly, but doesn't change my main point in any way.

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

#474

Post by SSLy » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 4:56 PM UTC

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.

Uhm, Linus makes seven figures.

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

#475

Post by heimatau » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

Is no one going to talk about the hypocrisy? Eric Schmidt isn't a beacon of sensible innovation pushing America forward. Peter Thiel called him out eight years ago [1] and I strongly encourage you to watch the 4 min clip.

[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q26XIKtwXQ

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

#476

Post by srtjstjsj » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 5:03 PM UTC

pontus wrote: post #448

As an employee of Google, it's sad to see it turn into a conventional company. Sure we take certain risks here and there, but by and large we're optimizing for the next quarter's PnL / growth. We would much rather invest in growing our ad revenue by x% than to start a new team doing something novel. Whenever a new idea comes up that's a bit outside the predictable path of OKRs, it's almost scoffed at, and you're impl…

The fact that "conventional company" was redefined because everyone started to be more like Google (as an operation, not privacy/advertising issues), is a great thing.

Google isn't a startup and there's no reason why it should be or why that would be good. "Innovation" isn't valuable if it isn't scaled up.

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

#477

Post by ls612 » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

joshuaissac wrote: post #295

wbl wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe has the single market, and lots of English speakers. But it also has very conservative capital and tax and employment systems that make entrepreneurship difficult. Some of that is easy to fix, some hard to fix.

Despite the name, the European Single Market is far less unified than that of the US. A company starting out in Europe will have to overcome linguistic, cultural and regulatory barriers in 27 different countries. While American companies still have to deal with regulatory differences across state borders, it is not quite the same as what European start-ups face.

The UCC is an unfair state sponsored advantage for the US in trade, according to the European Commission. (/s in case it is necessary)

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

#478

Post by srtjstjsj » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 5:06 PM UTC

emsy wrote: post #195

Tangential, since this article is about the US and China. But if the US has dropped the ball, then Europe (or the EU specifically) didn't even bother to go to the game. The only thing we're innovative at is coming up with regulations. And I say this as someone who thinks the US tech sector should be under much heavier regulatory scrutiny.

Europeans innovate for American companies because it's the largest common language zone of wealthy people.

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

#479

Post by TimWillebrands » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 5:06 PM UTC

weyland108 wrote: post #185

dayjobpork wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo It really annoys me when they bitch about not being able to bring in skilled workers from overseas because they can't find skilled people here... Hey, maybe they should fucking train someone! Usually when a tech boss is complaining about not having skilled staff locally it's code for "... I want to find someone cheaper overseas". It's like seeing a job ad that wants a wizard at everything but has terrible pay,…

Or they don’t really care where a skilled worker comes from... we should be able to higher and attract best and brightest across the world. Current immigration system is not setup for that.

Why do you feel that smart people from all over the world should serve the American economy?

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

#480

Post by srtjstjsj » Sun, Sep 13, 2020, 5:08 PM UTC

0xfaded wrote: post #306

AsyncAwait wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU is nowhere as culturally unified as the U.S is. So the pool of resources available isn't as large. I'd also not be so quick on the regulation front. Looking at the (lack of) environmental regulation in the US right about now or the absolute astonishing cost of any medical emergency, I'd say they went too far in the other direction.

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.

Powerful federal government only exists on newly settled land or post genocide or under dictatorship.

Germany tried that twice but the Americans stopped it. Either because the US didn't want that particular genocide or because they didn't want a unified Europe under european control.