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

We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 606 posts

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#381

Post by krastanov »

foxglacier wrote: post #368
shiroiuma wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. And what is the EU doing to attract American talent that doesn't want to live under the Trump regime with his ICE stormtroopers? Nothing really. Meanwhile, highly accomplished people in the US with Chinese ancestry are being wooed to China to do important R&D there.

Did you just compare Chinese immigration enforcement favorably against "ICE stormtroopers"? Foreigners in China have to tell the police where they live, even if it's just a stay in a hotel, and they get deported very quickly for minor crimes. There isn't a problem of illegal immigration in China because the police are so strict, nobody can get away with it!

Strict police does sound quite a bit less bad than fascist police...

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#382

Post by jimmymcgee73 »

hermanzegerman wrote: post #133
xiphias2 wrote: post #79

USA is still one of the top countries for scientists. Just as an example Europe had a few years of exporting the best GLP-1 drugs (finally something in which Europe was leader in science), Eli Lily quickly took it over. In software San Francisco is still the top for AI research: even when Peter Steinberger didn't know what he will do with OpenClaw, it was clear to him that the only place to move to was USA. Terrence…

I'm not sure how making a copycat "me-too" drug, after one was successfully developed shows how innovative a country or company is?

You realize semaglutide wasn’t the first GLP-1 right?

The first GLP-1 was exenatide, invented in America and released in collaboration with Eli Lilly.

In addition tirzepatide and retatrutide are not “just” GLP-1s. You frankly do not know what you are talking about.

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#383

Post by samrus »

rayiner wrote: post #268
conception wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, China has a tremendous pool of people to pull talent from. Do they need immigrants? Or just continue the path of “building it in-house”?

China’s pool is smaller than it seems. China has pursued a development trajectory that focuses on the leading provinces first. That is reasonable. Better to get Beijing and a few other key places to the leading edge first, instead of trying to incrementally move all 1.4 billion people together at the same pace. But the flip side of that is that China’s talent pool is a lot smaller, in practice, than 1.4 billion. Beca…

Those third world provinces have the potential to be improved up to the standard, especially when you have first world provinces to draw talent/knowledge from.

Having the people is important, the IS needed immigrants to have people, china already has enough people, it just needs to bring them up to par, which will only taoe a generation or two, and china is patient

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#384

Post by iamlintaoz »

rayiner wrote: post #268
conception wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, China has a tremendous pool of people to pull talent from. Do they need immigrants? Or just continue the path of “building it in-house”?

China’s pool is smaller than it seems. China has pursued a development trajectory that focuses on the leading provinces first. That is reasonable. Better to get Beijing and a few other key places to the leading edge first, instead of trying to incrementally move all 1.4 billion people together at the same pace. But the flip side of that is that China’s talent pool is a lot smaller, in practice, than 1.4 billion. Beca…

This is not true at all. China’s education system is nationally standardized. Although economic development is uneven with far greater investment concentrated in major cities than inland regions, the structure of education itself is consistent across the country. Schools follow the same national curriculum and use the same core teaching materials.

Income disparities may have some impact on teacher quality, but the difference is often less significant than people assume. Broad access to education tends to matter more than whether a particular middle-school teacher is exceptional. In fact, students in some inland provinces frequently achieve very high scores on the national college entrance examination, driven in part by strong incentives to gain admission to top universities and pursue opportunities in more economically developed regions.

Among younger generations, illiteracy is virtually nonexistent. With nine years of compulsory education mandated nationwide, basic literacy rates are effectively at 100 percent.

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#386

Post by zeroonetwothree »

hermanzegerman wrote: post #136
testfrequency wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the Peter mention funny because some of the other reasons he said it made sense to move to SF were that labor laws in Europe wouldn’t allow him to work 6-7 days a week, and he’d have to focus more on safety/responsibility in mind in Europe. He’s moving from London after all, arguably the global AI research hub. (Also likely SA told him the offer was contingent on him relocating)

Nobody would stop him from working 6-7 days a week. Only for forcing his employees to do this involuntarily for him.

Pretty sure the US doesn’t allow involuntary servitude.

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#387

Post by [deleted] »

tzs wrote: post #144
xiphias2 wrote: post #79

USA is still one of the top countries for scientists. Just as an example Europe had a few years of exporting the best GLP-1 drugs (finally something in which Europe was leader in science), Eli Lily quickly took it over. In software San Francisco is still the top for AI research: even when Peter Steinberger didn't know what he will do with OpenClaw, it was clear to him that the only place to move to was USA. Terrence…

> Just as an example Europe had a few years of exporting the best GLP-1 drugs (finally something in which Europe was leader in science), Eli Lily quickly took it over You make it sound like Europe was not a leader in any area of science until this one thing which they led in for a few years. > Terrence Tao was a good example of what happens when an exceptionally smart person stops getting funded by an American Univer…

[deleted]

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#388

Post by maxglute »

rayiner wrote: post #268
conception wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, China has a tremendous pool of people to pull talent from. Do they need immigrants? Or just continue the path of “building it in-house”?

China’s pool is smaller than it seems. China has pursued a development trajectory that focuses on the leading provinces first. That is reasonable. Better to get Beijing and a few other key places to the leading edge first, instead of trying to incrementally move all 1.4 billion people together at the same pace. But the flip side of that is that China’s talent pool is a lot smaller, in practice, than 1.4 billion. Beca…

US pool is also smaller than it seems. US doesn't have world / 8B to draw from, it has ~1B English speakers where 400-500m where EN is primary, another 600m where English is proficient. Shared with other advanced economy / Anglo institutions. Vs PRC has 1.2B Mandarin. US pool is also immigration gated, even with PRC's shit TFR, PRC will still knock ~2x new births for the foreseeable future vs US 3m newborn+immigration... and PRC can push that 6m disproportionately into STEM.

But PRC's actual talent pool is their 20 year back log of 10-15m per year births (100m+) that hasn't gone through tertiary, i.e. about another 40m+ STEM assuming they don't increase tertiary enrollment (currently 60%) or tertiary (40%). The worse case scenario for PRC is they will have ~OCED combined in STEM (not including other tiers of technical talent), or 3x+ more than US, assuming US pre Trump immigration patterns.

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#389

Post by autoexec »

rayiner wrote: post #353
autoexec wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think it'd be smart to support programs for gifted students and to screen for them. Those programs should be available to anyone in the US who qualifies regardless of where they live or what kind of money they have. Every student should be allowed and encouraged to reach their potential.

Your first point is in tension with your last point. A large fraction of the student population has a low ceiling of potential, and it’s very expensive to try and push them past that ceiling. The focus on doing so sucks up vast amounts of money and teacher attention that then gets pulled away from gifted kids. That’s why sober and clear-eyed countries like Germany conventionally sort students into tracks starting aro…

> Your first point is in tension with your last point.

It really isn't. Every student should have access to quality education that meets them at their level and challenges them. Money spent doing that is not wasted on the vast majority of students. We do not need to have trash tier schools for the majority of the population so that a select few can get better ones.

Identifying where students are at and what their needs are is a good idea that would enable kids to be moved to classes where teachers can work with them at their level. It doesn't necessitate refusing a quality education to anyone. Even students with special educational needs and disabilities deserve a good education.

When students are placed in classrooms according to their level it means that no teacher is pulled away from gifted kids, because those gifted kids have their own teacher working with them. It doesn't mean that children who aren't gifted can't get a high quality education. Putting kids in a class too far above or below their level is not delivering a quality education to them.

Giving every child an environment where they can learn to the best of their ability is expensive, but it's nowhere near as costly as not doing it. Uneducated illiterate children become uneducated illiterate adults and voters. It's not a coincidence that most prison inmates are functionally illiterate. Having a good education enables more children to have a successful future.

Re: We're no longer attracting top talent: the brain drain killing American science

#390

Post by WillPostForFood »

mulmen wrote: post #372
paulddraper wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly! “A concentration camp is a prison or other facility used for internment” Internment is long-term (see Wikipedia), whereas the ICE detention centers are short-term (average stay < 30 days but depends on time for deportation ).

> Internment is long-term (see Wikipedia), The Wikipedia page for Internment [1] doesn't include the words long-term when I view it. Internment is the imprisonment of people, commonly in large groups, without charges or intent to file charges. The term is especially used for the confinement "of enemy citizens in wartime or of terrorism suspects". Thus, while it can simply mean imprisonment, it tends to refer to preve…

Seamus Culleton is allowed to leave detention, he just can't stay in the US. He is choosing to stay in detention while he pursues legal challenges to his deportation order.
Post reply on HN