81–90 of 262 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exception:INRIA.
I searched for INRIA success stories. I found the MLdonkey peer-to-peer client written in OCaml. (I do remember using it many years ago. It was odd.) Where are the successful, world-changing company spinoffs?
Lets not fool ourselves. First and foremost the money is here and the business environment (capitalism) is the most favorable than any other region of the world.
It hasn’t always been this way. Prior to the 1900s the wealth was outside the US. Capitalism existed in the world before the US, possibly in more extreme forms. It seems like you’re discounting the possibility the US education system & government contributed to the current economic situation. To what do you attribute the change?
Socialist tendencies in the EU are a 20th century thing.
Europe was far more capitalist in the 18th and 19th century.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I searched for INRIA success stories. I found the MLdonkey peer-to-peer client written in OCaml. (I do remember using it many years ago. It was odd.) Where are the successful, world-changing company spinoffs?
Ok, that's the wrong measure. But didn't they sponsor basically the whole OCaml compiler, which has gone on to be hugely influential?
Is it though? I guess that's the difference between Europe and US in CS. In the US they find a way to make money on the innovations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Deleted
considering how most[1] of the best scientists from most countries eventually immigrate to the US, the reverse is true 1. Probably, based on nobel prizes https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/teaser/19646.jpeg
By comparison, 5% of all American scientists move to another country, of which 32% go to Canada, so about 1.6-1.7% total. Since the US has nine times more people, that means that in absolute numbers the 1.7% of American scientists is about equal to the 16% of Canadian scientists, but there is no reason to think that the 1.7% makes up the top tier of American scientists; why would the best move north of the border? In other words, the US is receiving the best of Canadian scientists in exchange for an equal number of its non-best.
By comparison, 5% of all American scientists move to another country, of which 32% go to Canada, so about 1.6-1.7% total. Since the US has nine times more people, that means that in absolute numbers the 1.7% of American scientists is about equal to the 16% of Canadian scientists, but there is no reason to think that the 1.7% makes up the top tier of American scientists; why would the best move north of the border? In other words, the US is receiving the best of Canadian scientists in exchange for an equal number of its non-best.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Deleted
considering how most[1] of the best scientists from most countries eventually immigrate to the US, the reverse is true 1. Probably, based on nobel prizes https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/teaser/19646.jpeg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, that's the wrong measure. But didn't they sponsor basically the whole OCaml compiler, which has gone on to be hugely influential?
> Ok, that's the wrong measure. Is it though? I guess that's the difference between Europe and US in CS. In the US they find a way to make money on the innovations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, that's the wrong measure. But didn't they sponsor basically the whole OCaml compiler, which has gone on to be hugely influential?
> Ok, that's the wrong measure. Is it though? I guess that's the difference between Europe and US in CS. In the US they find a way to make money on the innovations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ok, that's the wrong measure. Is it though? I guess that's the difference between Europe and US in CS. In the US they find a way to make money on the innovations.
Whereas in Europe university driven innovations are often placed in the public domain, especially in France. What is better for society? Depends on the viewpoint I guess.