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

How the U.S. became a science superpower

steveblank.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 529 posts

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#471

Post by WalterBright »

Swenrekcah wrote: post #409
WalterBright wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are no documented instances of a truly free market. There's no such thing as pure water, either. Nor is there any person who has not had impure thoughts. Nor can you ever cut a board to an exact length. Nor has anything created by man (or nature) been perfect. The historical reality is the more free a free market is, the better it performs. A free market does not have to be a "truly free market" in order to d…

It would be interesting to note how you define a free market in this context and what makes it “more free”. Because a market can not be free unless there are rules and they are enforced. Without rules and government intervention when necessary, what you get is the law of the jungle, which is precisely the thing the last 12000 years of human history has been about escaping.

A free market is not anarchy. It requires a government to protect rights, enforce contracts, and deal with externalities.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#472

Post by WalterBright »

ModernMech wrote: post #333
WalterBright wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My friend Eric Engstrom (yes, that guy) got a programming job at Microsoft despite having zero education beyond high school. He became a team leader for DirectX. I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering, not software. Yet I got jobs as a software developer with zero certifications. At the D Language Foundation, we have never asked any of our participants for there certifications. Some have PhDs, some have high schoo…

This post is a great example of how very smart people can fall victim to their own biases. When you put the "all are welcome" sign on the door of your programming language organization, you're not sampling from "all" but just the people who are already interested in programming, and especially the design and construction of programming languages. These people are inherently motivated to learn and particularly self mo…

> Where can they go, to claim certificates or whatever, for their new knowledge, to get any chance of employment?

That is what I responded to, especially the "any chance" aspect.

A young colleague of mine wanted a job at a FAANG company. He did not have a programming degree or cert. He knew he'd be faced with the dreaded leetcode interview, and wanted to know how to proceed. I suggested to him to get the leetcode books, and study them for 3 weeks or so. He balked at that, and I said the 3 weeks would be the best investment of time he'd likely ever make. He got the point, and studied for 3 weeks. He aced the leetcode interview and got the well-into-6-figures job.

The people with get-up-and-go are going to find a way get what they want.

P.S. The people who are members of the D Language Foundation are all self-selected get-up-and-go types. I enjoy watching them grow into first class programmers.

BTW, here in Seattle we have a monthly "D Coffee Haus" meeting, where we talk about programming and airplanes. It's been going for a year now, and I should have thought of starting that a long time ago.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#473

Post by Arainach »

WalterBright wrote: post #470
Arainach wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The historical reality is the more free a free market is, the better it performs. Citation VERY MUCH needed. A free market leads to monopoly and abuse. It does not lead to competition, it does not lead to better long-term results, it leads to corruption, market capture, and oppression.

The United States, postwar Japan, postwar Germany, Hong Kong, Taiwan, S Korea, China, and so on. How do you explain the scores of millions of people that came to the US, and still come, if the US free market is a hellhole of monopoly, abuse, corruption, and oppression?

The united states during its periods of greatest growth as well as the other environments you called out had strong regulatory environments to keep "the market" in check

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#475

Post by FredPret »

Retric wrote: post #233
FredPret wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, you overstate the problem. Look up the companies in the S&P 500 today, 10 years ago, 20, 30, 50. There are dramatic changes with only a handful of long term survivors.

That overstates the difference as mergers hardly destroy the old companies in their entirety. Instead it’s the same kind of shakeups you regularly see in government agencies. Picking one small example, HERSA is a merger of the Health Services Administration (1973–1982) and Health Resources Administration (1973–1982). However currently one of its major functions is managing the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program that showed…

A merger frequently involves major shakeups in both the acquirer and the acquired. You don’t have to, and shouldn’t destroy the old companies. You just want their resources redirected to more efficient uses every so often.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#476

Post by ModernMech »

WalterBright wrote: post #472
ModernMech wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This post is a great example of how very smart people can fall victim to their own biases. When you put the "all are welcome" sign on the door of your programming language organization, you're not sampling from "all" but just the people who are already interested in programming, and especially the design and construction of programming languages. These people are inherently motivated to learn and particularly self mo…

> Where can they go, to claim certificates or whatever, for their new knowledge, to get any chance of employment? That is what I responded to, especially the "any chance" aspect. A young colleague of mine wanted a job at a FAANG company. He did not have a programming degree or cert. He knew he'd be faced with the dreaded leetcode interview, and wanted to know how to proceed. I suggested to him to get the leetcode boo…

I get where you are coming from, I really do, I've worked with those self starters. I worked with a guy without any education past HS and he was great, he taught me a lot.

But the example was about a shop keeper playing candy crush on their phone, and you're relating it to experience with your highly motivated and bright colleagues working at your programming language organization, people I'm assuming you associate with based on their programming aptitude and innate interest in programming languages. How many shop keepers (the kind OP is referring to we're not talking about Good Will Hunting here) do you work with at your organization?

As an educator dealing with 20-somethings who are in the position of finding employment, I don't think what you're suggesting can scale. It's not a path the 100+ students I teach every semester can take. These students cannot pick up a leetcode book and study for 3 weeks and land a job at FAANG. Some of them have trouble landing a FAANG job with the degree, and the work experience, and project experience.

"The people with get-up-and-go are going to find a way get what they want."

Sure, this is just saying that the cream rises to the top. Maybe a handful of students could do it, but 90% of the rest of them not going to, so they need alternatives. And we need to provide those alternatives because like I said, you can't build an economy from cream.

95% of the people need a framework to educate themselves, they can't just go to youtube.com and come away with the ability to pass a Google interview in 3 weeks. They need focused, intensive study. A tight feeback loop. The ability to get 1:1 time with an expert to move past hurdles. The ability to work closely with peers and to work in groups. Broad and varied perspectives. Instruction from actual experts (which I will point out your college had and most people don't). You know, a real education.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#477

Post by fallingknife »

lompad wrote: post #352
fallingknife wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the problem is that I just don't trust them. It's a bunch of university administrators and government bureaucrats (two groups I trust on the level of used car dealers) spending other people's money. I think the solution to this is transparency. If these universities want to continue getting tax exempt status and generous overhead allocations out of taxpayer funds, then they should be required to release their…

You are fundamentally misunderstanding the balance of power here. In your mind it seems to be "those people come pleading for money so they can do research, giving it is essentially charity"- but it couldn't be further from the truth. Most top-tier researchers can do their science anywhere. If you don't make stuff easy and comfortable enough to hold them, they'll just leave the country. A significant chunk of science…

It is not charity for the researchers. That's money earned. It's charity for the bureaucrats who administer it. As for the facilities and administration it pays for, I take no issue with the facilities. I want to take an axe to the useless bureaucrats and lawyers involved. My dad is a university researcher and he faces endless bureaucratic nonsense to run his lab. If we want to keep researchers here we should start by making it easy for them. It's a cost savings too.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#478

Post by Retric »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #436
Retric wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming current trends are unchanged we’re still talking about having billions of humans for hundreds of years. On that kind of timescale we might see significant life extension, artificial wombs, and hard core genetic engineering. Some countries like South Korea are going to face major challenges far sooner, but frankly having the most extreme examples collapse means the average stays higher.

> Assuming current trends are unchanged we’re still talking about having billions of humans for hundreds of years. On that kind of timescale we might see significant life extension, artificial wombs, and hard core genetic engineering. The absolute number of humans isn't the issue. It's that people expect to retire at 65, but are now living into their 80s and 90s. Retirees have to be supported by working people, i.e.…

The ratio of younger vs older people is also a function of biological aging which might look very different in 500 years. I don’t think we can reasonably expect to retire at 65 if healthy lifespan hits 200+.

If 150 year olds are as healthy as current 50 year olds they may very well be expected to work. And personally I’d happily extend how long people are expected to work in exchange for significantly longer lifespans.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#479

Post by robertlagrant »

SecretDreams wrote: post #380
BobbyJo wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im afraid you'd need to be pretty liberal with your definition of rich at this point to dig us out of this hole through taxes alone.

Tax wealth somehow, not just income. It's clear the accumulation has become a generational problem. Your great grandkids could cure cancer and bezo's could do nothing and yours would never have a fraction of the wealth his have.

> Your great grandkids could cure cancer and bezo's could do nothing and yours would never have a fraction of the wealth his have.

This isn't a problem.

Re: How the U.S. became a science superpower

#480

Post by robertlagrant »

SecretDreams wrote: post #424
anonfordays wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Tax wealth somehow I don't unserstand how you can tax something that varies in value by double digit percentages every week. If Elon got taxed when TSLA was $450 per share, and six months later it's now $250 per share... How much should he be taxed? Should he be provided a tax refund?

He can't eat with his shares. He can use them as collateral for debt. Presently, that's how he dodges taxes. You'd close that loophole.

> He can't eat with his shares. He can use them as collateral for debt. Presently, that's how he dodges taxes. You'd close that loophole.

You also don't get taxed on your debts, e.g. a mortgage. You pay interest on your debt instead.

Post reply on HN