Slashdot Mirror
The US Drops Out of the Top 10 In Innovation Ranking (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: The U.S. dropped out of the top 10 in the 2018 Bloomberg Innovation Index for the first time in the six years the gauge has been compiled. South Korea and Sweden retained their No. 1 and No. 2 rankings. The index scores countries using seven criteria, including research and development spending and concentration of high-tech public companies. The U.S. fell to 11th place from ninth mainly because of an eight-spot slump in the post-secondary, or tertiary, education-efficiency category, which includes the share of new science and engineering graduates in the labor force. Value-added manufacturing also declined. Improvement in the productivity score couldn't make up for the lost ground.
South Korea remained the global-innovation gold medalist for the fifth consecutive year. China moved up two spots to 19th, buoyed by its high proportion of new science and engineering graduates in the labor force and increasing number of patents by innovators such as Huawei Technologies Co. Japan, one of three Asian nations in the top 10, rose one slot to No. 6. France moved up to ninth from 11th, joining five other European economies in the top tier. Israel rounded out this group and was the only country to beat South Korea in the R&D category. South Africa and Iran moved back into the top 50; the last time both were included was 2014. Turkey was one of the biggest gainers, jumping four spots to 33rd because of improvements in tertiary efficiency, productivity and two other categories. The biggest losers were New Zealand and Ukraine, which each dropped four places. The productivity measure influenced New Zealand's shift, while Ukraine was hurt by a lower tertiary-efficiency ranking.
South Korea remained the global-innovation gold medalist for the fifth consecutive year. China moved up two spots to 19th, buoyed by its high proportion of new science and engineering graduates in the labor force and increasing number of patents by innovators such as Huawei Technologies Co. Japan, one of three Asian nations in the top 10, rose one slot to No. 6. France moved up to ninth from 11th, joining five other European economies in the top tier. Israel rounded out this group and was the only country to beat South Korea in the R&D category. South Africa and Iran moved back into the top 50; the last time both were included was 2014. Turkey was one of the biggest gainers, jumping four spots to 33rd because of improvements in tertiary efficiency, productivity and two other categories. The biggest losers were New Zealand and Ukraine, which each dropped four places. The productivity measure influenced New Zealand's shift, while Ukraine was hurt by a lower tertiary-efficiency ranking.
The Plan is working. This is what winning looks like. Coupled with the 30 percent tarriff on solar, we're going to innovate ourselves down to the bottom.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Or perhaps it shows you live under a rock with little to no knowledge of the world around you.
Personally I'm surprised the US ranked so high when lately it seems the only things they're truly innovative with is dodging taxes, bribing politicians, and suing each other. :)
>> I'm surprised the US ranked so high
Space travel. The Internet. iPhones. Commercial space travel. Quantum mechanics. Nuclear bombs. Tang. Google.
It's harder to name something innovative that DIDN'T start here than the reverse. Again, how could the methodology be so flawed as to bury the US?
That would obviously favor larger countries.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
This is exactly what happens when your culture: denigrates "experts"; relies on "faith" vs "facts" when choosing political leaders; worships reality-TV (an oxymoron if there ever was one), sports and porn above knowledge about relevant topics (quick test: name the top 3 ports players on your ${LOCAL_SPORTS_TEAM}, then name the 3 people who represent you in the US Congress. Start Jeopardy theme....), whip in a spicy sauce of economic decline and inequality destroying people's faith in capitalism and politics to fix these issues while we fixate on who kneels at afootball game and who can use which bathroom, all cheered on by plainly propaganda "news" sources (yeah, I'm looking at you Fox. Your Bret Baier fig leaf ain't big enough to hide the huge propaganda schlong that you are) and you have the Perfect Storm for a civilizational decline. One time it's really good to be an Old Fart(TM) is right about now....
we keep cutting funding to education and research. Companies don't innovate. There's not enough money on the table to make it worth while. Aside from the occasional bored aristocrat it's mostly been the government that financed innovation; usually through the public university system. But nobody wants to pay the taxes for that. Heck, we just borrowed $1.5 trillion over 10 years to finance massive tax cuts (although the cuts for the middle class expire in 10 years, we're not crazy or anything).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
... we're staffing almost all of our BioTech staff in Vietnam. We have several championship winners of regional (ASEAN) computing competitions as well as the very top students in A.I. and computational theory (essential for crunching the gigantic datasets that the genomic revolution is bringing).
It is very difficult to get even these supremely qualified candidates work permits (unless we're willing to game the system like some Indian outsourcing companies) and even then it's literally a lottery. So their minds, the technology they create and benefits (and investment) that follows will stay overseas.
Maybe we'll go to Canada.
The fact that our president is an openly racist ignorant fraud doesn't help (in the first meeting with the Prime Minister with Vietnam, Trump went around to all present making fun for a few minutes of his name "Phuc". Imagine that, the "leader" of the free world acting like a third grade Beavus and Butt-Head. I understand that this has happened with other leaders who've had the misfortune of being introduced to Trump).
Space travel
Yes, but who do you think owns patents on parts you in US use?
The Internet
The best the US can do is 80s/90s era ICs. Modern ICs drive the high bandwidth of the modern Internet. Welcome.
iPhones
You all are very good at drawing neat things, yes. Do you think engineer in the US actually put together blueprints for A10 processor?
Commercial space travel
Okay you win that one.
Quantum mechanics
That is not an innovation so much as a discovery, so perhaps your methodology is flawed. But no cares, point for the US for innovating quantum mechanics into existence.
Nuclear bombs
I think you all won that award two generations ago. But if your country wants to keep polishing trophy, sure.
Tang
Oh I see, sarcasm.
Google
That is a company. Now their AI, that is something you can loft up. Google is not the only person for AI. So innovative maybe fifteen years ago, perhaps?
Again, how could the methodology be so flawed as to bury the US?
Because you all are not innovative. You are not making things, you are outsourcing to other countries to make bits and pieces that make what you all hold to be innovative. Being third link in an chain, is not being innovative, it is just be clever in putting puzzle pieces together. Do not be a puzzle solver, be a puzzle maker.
The article is about the 2018 list, not the 1968 list. 50 years ago, the US was the most innovative country on the planet. No other country could be compared to the US. But since the 80s, the US is clearly falling behind. What made the US such a great country started to die during the 80s. I'm not American, so I'm not qualified to state exactly what went wrong, but it's clear the US need a political party who truly believes in "MAGA" (not just a president with very limited power).
I agree with you 100 percent. Many, if not most of the countries in the developing world have long had stances hostile to immigration similar to Trump's. A large part of what made America great was that we were open to immigration for 400 years, and each successive wave contributed qualities that we didn't really have before.
Most of these waves of immigrants were opposed by some of the old timers who felt insecure in their careers and positions on the social ladder. It's no different today, although the anti-immigration folks try to present it as being different. Human nature doesn't change very much from one generation to the next.
Space travel: Russia
iPhones: Finland (Derivative of Nokia)
Commercial space travel: Ariane/Astrium
Quantum mechanics: Germany (Einstein, 1905)
Nuclear bombs: basic knowledge was in Europe, much of the original research was conducted in Britain.
Tang: I'll give you this one. But what about Red Bull?
Google: USA.
You were saying?
Even so, many of those are in the past. Tertiary education is becoming unaffordable for many people, which will limit the future of STEM in the USA.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
What went wrong is that we legalized bribery in the '70s by equating speech with money and declaring bribes to be free speech. We then went about throwing out the antitrust regulations so that companies could stifle innovation from rivals and expanded IP rights to the point where it's difficult to do anything that doesn't infringe on somebody's property.
And if that weren't enough, we pretty much destroyed labor so that the small parties that were previously the source of most innovation mostly didn't have the money or job security to do anything interesting.
There's still innovation going on, but it's not anywhere near what it used to be or should be. And it's probably not going to get any better as long as we've got two right wing pro-corporate parties.
Sweden pioneered gender reassignment surgery and has allowed people to legally change their gender since 1972. It's also second on the list.
As for "microagressions", as an old fart I don't like that word. I prefer to call it "acting like a dick". One thing years of hiring people taught me is to not hire anyone if the interview gives even a whiff of dickishness.
If I could go back in time and tell my younger self one thing to avoid doing, it would be working with all those workplace trouble makers, trying to teach them how to be better team players. Firing would be more effective sensitivity training and a lot less trouble for me.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
It may well be true that we are graduating fewer people in STEM, but, we are also right-sizing the number of people that go into STEM. If we doubled the number of engineering grads, that would just mean we would have a glut of unemployed engineers that will spend most of their lives paying off their expensive educations working at jobs that will never let them use their technical thinking skills.
So let's not pretend that if someone graduates a EE in the USA that he or she will actually ever get paid to design a circuit.
The best the US can do is 80s/90s era ICs. Modern ICs drive the high bandwidth of the modern Internet. Welcome.
Approximately 75% of Intel's semiconductor fabrication is performed in the USA.. That includes 14nm and 10nm foundries, with a 7nm foundry planned to open in the US as well.
GlobalFoundries has a presence in the US and is pushing out 60,000 wafers a month outside of Albany, NY with process at 14, 22 and 28 nm. (that's a lot, the largest in the world are pushing about 150,000 wafers/month)
Tower Semiconductor has US foundries, although it is not a US company, dealing with some more exotic ICs for mixed signal and high performance analog. They're frequently making special purpose ASICs for telecommunications, so there's your "high bandwidth Internet" right there.
Does the US manufacture the most ICs? No way, not by a long shot, the tiny Island nation of Taiwan has the big United States beat by an order of magnitude. But the US still operates cutting edge silicon foundries, so it's premature to say "The best the US can do is 80s/90s era ICs"
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Well... generally life expectancy is a pretty big medical outcome. Considering how much the US spends it's kinda sad it is somewhere around 30-something to 40-something place.
Innovations are not all patented. And not every patent is an innovation.
You are welcome on my lawn.
A great deal of the US's innovation is made by foreign researchers working in the US. The US used to be open about grant money. The US used to fund education and research. The US used to give green cards to the world's best and bright. We used to bring in the best people to our great Universities, and keep them here by having great opportunities after graduation.
If we shift to a society driven by anti-intellectualism and xenophobia, we can expect the world to pass us by and our prestige and leadership to fade away. Acting like a bully is not going to make us great again. Having brilliant people come to our universities then go home immediately after graduate school is not going to bring innovation to our nation. We can expect to continue or descent if we keep electing based on ignorance, populism, and isolationism.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Where's brand management?
Leveraging synergies?
Obesity?
Strategic reassignment of global presence?
Operational guidance of private sector management of the state?
Upward redeployment of economic value propositions with attendent infiltration to lower skilled resources?
I don't see the point of this survey.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
No problem! Thanks to you-know-who, kids now quickly and often remind somebody when they are a "bigly loooozer!". MKGA! I'm serious, my relatives' kids & friends do it all the time.
As far as "innovation"; filtering (identifying), executing, packaging, and marketing play at least as big a role as raw ideas. There's no shortage of interesting ideas floating around. But that's just 1st base of success. Read "Hacker News" if you want lists.
[begin promo rant] For example, I'd really like to see a company create a "dynamic relational" RDBMS. It would make prototyping and small projects much easier: no need to directly create schemas because they are "create on use". You can later tighten them up by adding constraints as a project matures. The co. can give out a lighter version as OSS, and charge a fee for the enterprise edition, similar to PHP/Zend's model.
Table-ized A.I.
A large part of what made America great was that we were open to immigration for 400 years.
Except we didn't have social safety nets for 400 years, which is one reason many support merit based immigration policies and not this immigration diversity lottery joke.
First of all, ewww. Also, are you saying Jews aren't white? Also, ewww.
Aside from being racist, this comment is also factually wrong. Space travel (commercial or otherwise), the Internet and the iPhone had nothing particular to do with Jews. Lary Page isn't Jewish, so attributing Google to "Jews" is also somewhat strange.
Many Americans innovated. Some of them were Jewish.
What I'd like to see is a list of innovations (by industry) made in the last 5 years (or even 10), and next to that where that innovation was made and by whom. Then we would have some idea of how to make an innovation ranking.
Bloomberg's rankings don't look at actual innovations but rather the potential for innovations being created.
For example, India produces something like 25% of the world's engineers, but I'm pretty sure 25% of the world's engineering is not being done in India.
Here's Bloomberg's categories:
R&D intensity (R&D expenditure as % of GDP)
Manufacturing value-added (MVA as % GDP and per capita)
Productivity (GDP and GNI per employed person age 15+ and 3Y improvement)
High-tech density (Number of domestic high-tech public companies such as aerospace, defense, biotech,hardware, software, semiconductors, internet software and services, and renewable energy companies as % of publicly listed companies and as share of total world public high-tech)
Tertiary efficiency (how much of population has advanced degrees in the labor force plus what percent is tech degrees)
Researcher concentration (percent of population (per million) that are engaged in R&D)
Patent activity (patent filings, patents in force, per million population, patent filings per $100 billion GDP, and total grants by country as share of world total.)
Countries whose economies grow a lot of food, or use natural resources, or have low unemployment get dinged by the per capita and percent rankings. Bloomberg's methodology favors small manufacturing-intensive countries whether or not that country actually invents anything new at all.
That's why Iceland is above Russia.
Or Ireland above the UK. really?
You imagine you are smart, which is a function of how you are not.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Patents stifle innovation. So does a police state. So does disinvestment in public education. So does economic depression and the collapse of the middle class.
It's harder to name something innovative that DIDN'T start here than the reverse
Space travel - first man made object in space was the V2. Early space program in both US and USSR carried on from German rocketry, with German scientists
Quantum mechanics - Planck is usually considered to be first. Einstein is German born but a US citizen, then you've got Heisenberg and Born for Germany and Schrodinger from Austria. I'm not arguing Einstein's importance, nor his citizenship, but QM DIDN'T start in the US
Nuclear bombs - the US produced the first, but the ideas around fission go back to the 30s and both the USSR and Germany had independent and parallel programs. Not sure that it's innovation if others are doing it and you just beat them to production.
Tang - a powdered fruit drink? Powdered milk and instant coffee go back to the late 1800s. I'm not sure that Tang qualifies as innovative (unless there's more to it than I understand)
Of the other examples, some are weak (Commercial space flight is double counting, the innovative part is space flight, commercialising technology is ordinary), others are evolutionary (Google's search engine, the iPhone) which while still innovative are weakly so.
The clearest example you provide is the Internet. While other countries provided some of the early elements (UK and packet switching for eg), the overall concept, development and the majority of the work was all US.
Patents are the *opposite* of innovation.
I said America first and I meant it, not some foreign country like "Inner vashun". Where the hell is that? Part of outer mongolioid? Anyway. Back to fox news. Did you see Megin Kelly ream that Janey Fonda bitch? I gotta see that again in slo-mo. Eric! Get me some god-damn cheeseburgers, boy.
And lawful-bribery....
Because if you want to evaluate how good a country is at fostering innovation, you should be measuring how efficient they are, not how many heads you can throw at a problem.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
We still don't have a social safety net. Long term welfare dependency programs, sure, we got lots of those. But zero help for productive working people down on their luck.
Patents are a poor metric of innovation, and per capita rankings are going to be more useful at evaluating the overall culture, as opposed to how much money and manhours you can throw at a problem.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Pretty much the only big tech company in Europe is Phillips, and arguably their most high tech product is LED lights
Philips also makes high-end medical devices: magnetic resonance scanners, tomographs, radiation therapy systems, and so on.
Circumcision is child abuse.
ASML, Siemens, KUKA to name a few. Philips is mostly medical.
Don't confuse advertising companies with high tech either.
I used to live near the Mayo Clinic. I know full well how often people with money come to the US for their health care - even from those 29 or 39 countries ahead of us on that list.
And no, average or median life expectancy is not a medical outcome. Years survived after a cancer diagnosis, for example, is a medical outcome. And for many forms of cancer, the US is #1 - sometimes by a decade or two. Which is why rich Canadians and rich Europeans come here for their treatments, and approximately zero rich Americans leave the country for major medical treatments.
And yes, I'm aware that a lot of minor medical procedures can be done for a tiny fraction of the cost in Mexico or India, and that a lot of upper middle class people go there to get their boob jobs and root canals.
Not that we are perfect. After 70 years of Democrat meddling, I feel pretty confident in saying that we have the worst medical billing system in the world.
See that "Preview" button?
Yes, but who do you think owns patents on parts you in US use?
Later on in your post you nitpick about who manufactures it, yet here you nitpick about who invented it. But even then, this is just that, a nitpick, because very few components are covered by foreign patents. I recall when SpaceX first successfully landed a first stage rocket, and they shouted USA! USA! USA! internet forums, including slashdot, were being raged at by people abroad saying that it wasn't just the USA that did that...only, it was just the USA. SpaceX is 100% domestic, and the company that paid for the launch is also a US company. And most importantly, NOBODY else has pulled anything even close to that off. The US private sector is technologically superior to every government in the world in this respect. But that doesn't even touch on NASA. The ESA has yet to run a single successful Mars mission in spite of many attempts. Russia has, but they're mostly failures. The US has run many more than both combined, and nearly all were successful, some succeeding by far beyond what the original mission called for.
Yes, the US really is THAT much better than the rest of the world here, and coming soon to a global theater near you, we're going to put a submarine under titan's ice, and the James Webb Space Telescope will be a NASA creation, with relatively small assistance from ESA and CSA, and is in fact being constructed by two US companies.
The best the US can do is 80s/90s era ICs. Modern ICs drive the high bandwidth of the modern Internet. Welcome.
If I didn't already know you were somebody butthurt over the US utterly dominating this space, I'd think you were making a joke. The #1 and #2 top creators of CPUs and GPUs are US companies, and most of the world's most used ASICs (especially ASICs that power most advanced networking equipment like switches and certain types of routers) are created here. The top technology companies for internet communication in the world are Cisco, Intel, Qualcomm, and Broadcom. Nokia comes close admittedly in just the wireless side, but they still don't match those four. Anything beyond these, i.e. realtek or huawei, create substandard components. Quite simply, without us, the rest of the world would be back in the 90's.
That is not an innovation so much as a discovery, so perhaps your methodology is flawed. But no cares, point for the US for innovating quantum mechanics into existence.
Pretty sure he's referring to making practical uses for quantum mechanics. Presently that is 85% only the US, with China being maybe another 10%, with the rest being divided among other places.
That is a company. Now their AI, that is something you can loft up. Google is not the only person for AI. So innovative maybe fifteen years ago, perhaps?
You're handwaving away the fact that Google is still at the forefront of AI research and development. They're also at the forefront of self driving cars, the world's most used web browser, the world's most used smartphone OS, the world's most used email service, and web search engines, in which theirs is the one that most of the world is hopelessly dependent upon. Though they're not unique in this regard, as the world's economies are hopelessly dependent upon much US technology, including our ICs, namely those made by Intel, AMD, Nvidia, and Qualcomm, and US software from the likes of Google, Mozilla, Apple, Microsoft, VMware, Citrix, Adobe, Amazon, and many others.
Because you all are not innovative. You are not making things, you are outsourcing to other countries to make bits and pieces that make what you all hold to be innovative. Being third link in an chain, is not being innovative, it is just be clever in putting puzzle pieces together. Do not be a puzzle solver, be a puzzle maker.
And at the start of your post, you were acting as though the intellectual property matters the most, but
By that definition, if a new country that just had one person, and that person invented the wheel, then that country would be the biggest innovator in the world.
Space travel - first man made object in space was the V2. Early space program in both US and USSR carried on from German rocketry, with German scientists
Early USSR rocketry experiments were done before and during the WWII, resulting in development of Katyusha ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ). By the end of the WWII, the USSR already had a sophisticated homegrown rocketry program. As a result, Soviet rocket designs were completely unlike the German V2s.
German scientists were mostly captured by the US for obvious reasons.
Who invented this stupid "innovation" ranking, anyway?
Space travel started in the Soviet Union and quantum mechanics in Germany. The only thing that's actually innovative in that list and that started in the USA is the Internet. The rest are just products and applications of existing technology.
So you think throwing a dog into orbit to die counts as space travel and the US did no original or innovative work in this area?
The Russians were also the first to send a human into space.
You were saying...?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
You're saying that unwillingness to suffer assholes makes one a fascist? I had come to expect better than that from you.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Mod parent Funny.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
People are also traveling to Israel for medical treatment. So?
>> I'm surprised the US ranked so high
Space travel. The Internet. iPhones. Commercial space travel. Quantum mechanics. Nuclear bombs. Tang. Google.
Er - Quantum mechanics? Erwin Schrödinger (Austrian), Werner Heisenberg (German), Max Born (German)...
The rest show the USA used to be good at innovation. They don't mean it's good at it now.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Space travel.
Was innovative half a century ago.
The Internet.
Was innovative half a century ago.
iPhones.
Not innovative. Just took something others already done and marketed it as if it was innovative.
Commercial space travel.
The same thing every country with a space agency does but in the private sector? Hardly innovative.
Quantum mechanics.
Just slightly behind 10 other countries involved in CERN.
Nuclear bombs.
Was innovative half a century ago.
70% of the US population weren't even alive when the majority of your list took place.
It should come to no surprise that the ranking would be slightly different these days.
If we are going to live on old merits then the US rank behind China, Egypt, Greece, Turkey and every other place that used to be a great innovative center in its time.
SpaceX is 100% domestic,
You mean that company founded by an immigrant from a Shithole country?
Mod parent up! Well said!
I want to add that has pretty much been it since WW2. All that has changed is geographically where our funding has gone and how much deeper our influence has pervaded into countries.
Also the US is the world leader in many other industries from agriculture (outside genetics too), software, entertainment, shipping & logistics, fishing, and of course weapons & defense.
A few industries that the US has fallen behind on is things like virtual social environments, flood control, and factory automation (thou Japan, China, & Germany don't build them at home ;).
Space travel. The Internet. iPhones. Commercial space travel. Quantum mechanics. Nuclear bombs. Tang. Google.
Yes, the US used to do great things. But genetic engineering on humans? China only, due to regulations. Space travel? Well, the US government canceled all its programs, and buys space on other's launches. Some private work, but that's being duplicated by others elsewhere in the world, and the lead isn't clear, and the lead is by an immigrant from Africa. Nuclear Bombs. Nope. The US is not working on new nuclear bombs. Rather than decommissioning thousands and replacing them with hundreds, for cost savings while not decreasing strike capabilities, the US spends defense budgets on airplanes to replace old ones that do a better job than the new ones.
It's harder to name something innovative that DIDN'T start here than the reverse.
Well, since you are going back 50+ years, who made the first automobile?And your space travel example is insane. First man in space? First man in orbit? First satellite? First rocket? None of that was US. The US had the first man on the moon. Yay, one first out of hundreds. So let's pretend that's the only one that matters. How's that Space Shuttle program doing?
Learn to love Alaska
Europe is less likely to have a mega-corp with unrelated arms. Sony and the like are less common. But companies like Bosch are considered #1 in the world in their field. And many of the #1 in the world in their field are in Europe.
Learn to love Alaska
Don't forget the 8 prototypes of a border wall and the trick to have it paid by another nation!
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Frauenhofer Society (research in many fields... chances are you're using one of their codecs). Spotify? Skype? SAP? Waze and TomTom? And there are countless smaller firms. Which in a lot of cases are absorbed by American ones.
America's advantage isn't its R&D or climate for innovation, but its market. The US market offers opportunity and a large enough volume to allow startups instant access to an enormous market that helps them grow quickly into companies valued in the billions, and ready to take on the world. Europe may have a single market, which helps, but it isn't a homogeneous one by any means. Even companies offering digital services find it hard and expensive to establish themselves in markets other than their home country, and they often take a good while to expand beyond the border.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
For every high tech company you can name overseas, the US has one that outclasses it in every way
So what company in the US outclasses ASML in every way? And Bosch? Or Toyota?
Pretty much the only big tech company in Europe is Phillips
If you choose to ignore ABB, Akzo Nobel, Alstom, Airbus, ASML, AstraZeneca, BAE, BASF, Bayer, BMW, Bosch, Continental, Daimler, Dassault, Dürr, Electrolux, Ericsson, Fiat, Fresenius, GlaxoSmithKline, Ineos, Infineon, KUKA, Leonardo, Mahle, Merck, Michelin, Nokia, Novartis, NXP, Osram, PSA, Renault, Rheinmetall, Roche, Rolls Royce, Safran, Sanofi, SAP, Schaeffler, SKF, Siemens, STMicroelectronics, Technicolor, ThyssenKrupp, Voestalpine, Voith, Volkswagen, Volvo, Wärtsilä, Zeiss, ZF and quite a few others, and drop a superfluous L in the name of Philips, sure. There are many, many more small ones too.
And where do the machines come from to make these wafers?
16th. ranked The Netherlands is where some of the most advanced are made by ASML, the others are Nikon and Canon.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Also, training ex-coal miners to make solar panels like HRC wanted might have kept us in the top 10. Just Saying.
Do you think engineer in the US actually put together blueprints for A10 processor?
Yup. Most of Apple's CPU design team is based in the US. Qualcomm also has a large team in San Diego and most CPU vendors do a lot of design work in Austin.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
More freedom seem like a good thing. Then again maybe we are better.
The US had a huge advantage at the end of the second world war, because they were basically the only industrialised nation that hadn't been fighting on their own soil and had fairly limited engagement. The US lost 0.32% of its population in WWII. The UK lost 0.94%, France lost 1.44%, the USSR lost 13.7%. A lot of infrastructure in Europe was destroyed by bombing, whereas the US only lost overseas assets.
This then had a knock on effect that working in the US was very attractive to displaced researchers and engineers. Would you rather work in Poland, which had just been rolled over by the Nazi and Soviet armies who, between them, had killed around 17% of the total population and destroyed most of the infrastructure, or in the US? If you had useful skills, US universities and research labs would fly you out and relocate the surviving parts of your family. Remember that rationing didn't end in the UK until 1954 - there were shortages of a lot of staples right up until then, and if you can't even guarantee food then getting access to the latest scientific equipment is not very likely. If you were good, then the offer of tenure at a US university and comparatively unlimited funds without any problems getting equipment was very attractive.
For the next couple of decades, the US benefitted hugely from having recruited all of these people and concentrated them in places with far better support systems than anywhere else. This continued for a while, because going to the university that had the top 5 people in the world in a subject area was a big draw, but it gradually faded as the standard living elsewhere recovered and surpassed the US.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
As a reason for why Sweden isn't number one or what?
Rent we even more poisoned? Though it may be an American trend at first. But we are always the leading progressives.
The article points to Samsung, which has many plants and thousands of US employees, because they've created the most US patents. So what?
Having lived in South Korea for many years, I would point to the fact that they innovate extremely little, but are outstanding at copying things that others have invented. I could go into a long winded cultural explanation (don't go all "you racist" on me here...my ex wife and kid are Korean) regarding why, but I'm too lazy for that this morning.
Just another day in Paradise
"Tertiary education is becoming unaffordable for many people, which will limit the future of STEM in the USA."
And yet, we put out a much higher percentage of tertiary degrees than we ever did back in the 50s, 60s, 70s... go figure.
Just another day in Paradise
This is from a five year old article on Samsung, but illustrates the point that Samsung is a very US company...
Although Samsung is globally headquartered in South Korea, it contributes significantly to the U.S. economy each year. In Texas alone, where Samsung has a major manufacturing facility, the company has provided the state’s largest foreign investment to date. Samsung’s semiconductor operation in Austin, Texas, constitutes a $13 billion investment in the state and this number is expected to exceed $15 billion at the end of 2014. The facilities employ more than 5,000 people and generate $1.5 billion in revenue annually, as Congressman Pete Sessions (R-TX) and Texas State Senators Ken Paxton and Kirk Watson recognized in public comments to the ITC in June.
Another Samsung subsidiary, Samsung Telecommunications America, headquartered in Richardson, Texas, employs more than 1,100 workers in the state. Samsung also recently broke ground on a new 1.1 million square foot development, which will serve as the company’s R&D headquarters in San Jose. The company’s plans were highlighted in Gov. Jerry Brown’s State of the State speech earlier this year, in which he noted that the facility is expected to provide 2,500 high-skill and wage 2,500 jobs.
Just another day in Paradise
Oh, bravo PopeRatzo!
Mod Parent Up!
Just another day in Paradise
Assuming that, at the time, the wheel had not been invented, yes. Assuming it had been invented, that person didn't invent the wheel, they reinvented the wheel, which is not an innovation.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
One thing years of hiring people taught me is to not hire anyone if the interview gives even a whiff of dickishness.
As an old fart, you've planted yourself in a cozy workspace environment and have figured out how to repel anybody who would ever do anything to rock the boat.
You may want to research things a little instead of being a Humpty Dumpty about what means what. Just Google “examples of microaggressions” and see what comes out. The first is some Buzzfeed article, but for the sake of everyone involved I will link you to the second hit from a somewhat more reputable .edu address.
Is this you understanding of “being a dick”? Half of these are things I have never heard anyone say in a ten mile radius of a college campus, the other half are so benign that you have to have very special interpretative skills to qualify that as being anything close to a dick. QED: I believe the most qualified person should get the job. and Why do you have to be so loud / animated? Just calm down. Christ, I am certain that by many definitions your whole post is a major microaggression because you are not letting dicks express themselves or something like that.
Also, unlike the USA, the Russians still have the capability to send a human into space.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
While I agree with this sentiment overall, something I'd like to point out: you're the wealthiest country at the moment, and will remain so for another decade or so at least, China's inevitably going to bypass you on grounds of size, but in terms of per capita GDP you're going to remain on the top. This means that for commercialization purposes the US is indeed the top market for technology. However what's being discussed here is innovation, not commercialization. The medical side is a good example in a way: the US has the most commercialized medical system in the world, which means there's a lot of money to be made by selling medical tech and meds in the US. This drives the creation of products to the market, but that doesn't mean the research that goes into the solutions is solely American. Gene therapy for example is an area of huge research globally, with universities and companies in all advanced societies putting money into it. The current CRISPR/CAS9 basis for gene therapy was pioneered by 2 women, one of them being the American biochemist Jennifer Doudna working from Berkly California, and another one being the French biochemist Emmanuelle Charpantier who used to work in Sweden and now works in Germany. Similar examples can be found elsewhere in tech. You took up CPUs; the first commercially manufactured microprocessor by Intel, the Intel 4004, was designed under the lead of Frederico Faggin, an Italian. 2 indian engineers, Vinod Dham and Rajeev Chandtasekhar were part of the core team that developed the 486 chip. And so on.
I'm not trying to say you're incorrect in what you were saying about the end products of cutting edge tech often coming from American companies, that's obvious because you've got the most money which also means you're the source for most of the R & D money on the private sector. I'm just pointing out that the innovations and research that are needed to make those products possible are the result of a global effort of a multitude of scientists The vast majority of major american breakthroughs rely on people and knowledge from around the world, so they're not purely 'American' innovations in that sense.
"It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
Einstein didn't become a US citizen until long after he had done his best work.
The Internet is pretty much a US innovation but most people (wrongly) equate the Internet with the World Wide Web and that came out of CERN in Europe.
Europe also has the internal combustion engine and the gas turbine.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Was America ever that great though? I mean, it was certainly powerful and the world's largest economy, but think about why it became that way.
Europe and had two major wars and was left in ruins and mountains of debt. Japan was devastated too. That allowed US manufacturing to boom with little opposition. Then you have things like the space race and military development, which were driven by the Russian threat.
Things were pretty good for some people... Straight white men, specifically. In the 60s you had women's liberation and increasing equality for non-whites, even now things are not that great for those groups. And if you were gay... It took until the 2010s for you to get the same basic rights everyone else has.
So while America certainly was a great and powerful country, for a lot of people the 20th century wasn't a particularly great time to be alive there. Of course most of the world was the same or worse, but the "Make America Great Again" implies that it used to be great, and that only seems to hold true if you were straight and white and male, and even then there is a good chance it sucked for you.
I'm not trying to run America down, just point out that like most places progress that has improved things for most people, and going backwards isn't the best plan.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
[QUOTE]And your space travel example is insane. First man in space? First man in orbit? First satellite? First rocket? None of that was US. The US had the first man on the moon. Yay, one first out of hundreds. So let's pretend that's the only one that matters.[/QUOTE]
First, and still only. Not as important to our everyday lives as satellites, to be sure, but still the most impressive space feat (and yes, more than 50 years ago).
In Europe you have, off the top of my head, Philips, ARM, Siemens, Airbus, Saab, numerous car manufacturers, Bosch... And of course we invented the WWW, and the affordable personal computer. Actually we invented electronic computers too.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It is relative to the size of the country.
There is quite a lot coming out of South Korea for a country with a population of 50 million. Sure, we talk more about China and the US, maybe even India, but these countries are huge compared to the likes of Sweden and Singapore, so there isn't too much merit.
SpaceX is 100% domestic,
You mean that company founded by an immigrant from a Shithole country?
Yes, because that is the very definition of being an American.
I love working with people who rock the boat for a good reason, but it's not the rocking per se that is important; it's the struggle over the best direction to head the boat in. Hijacking the boat so you can act out your personal psychodrama may have the effect of rocking the boat, but it's not the same thing.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
This is exactly on-point. If it were just about me, I'd work with every single employee until he became a success. But it costs the other people in the workplace; at some point being kind to one person is being unkind to everyone else
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
None of the measures mentioned actually track innovation. The measures specified can be pretty subjective and not necessarily relevant to innovation although I can see how some old schoolers would assume them to be indicators of potential for innovation. Post-Secondary and Tertiary graduates in the workforce, for example. Investment in Research and Development, for example. Much of the microcomputing technology was born in the U.S. by college dropouts. Furthermore, the qualities of engineers in some of these countries are pretty controversial, such as the very high rate of cheating on exams and even peer review papers from Chinese. Moreover, in the U.S. (and I think likely the world), most R&D money is spent by large corporations but it springs up predominantly from small businesses. That fact alone pretty much kills the validity of calling this a measurement of Innovation by different countries. In any case, it's all indirect and will be very hard to argue any correlation with actual innovative output.
> Sweden pioneered gender reassignment surgery
Not really.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Swedish surgeons got much, much better at it. But the surgical treatment of gender dysphoria, especially when re-routing the urethra for penile or vaginal transgender surgery, has been a mixed blessing. While effective for some, it has *not* been a panacea, it is expensive to do and to support long term, and has opened the door for enormous political and social pain and confusion for millions of people misled about the long-term results and benefits. Its medical and psychological benefits are not as resoundingly positive as some political activists would have you believe. The mortality rate for them is quite high.
For graphs, see http://journals.plos.org/ploso...
People are also traveling to Israel for medical treatment. So?
Proportionately so? I know many come to the US, to places like Cleveland Clinic, Johns Hopkins and Mayo. I hear such great things about Canadian healthcare, but when my aunt from Ontario had brain cancer, the wait for treatment pretty much killed her...you can't pay to get treatment earlier there.
Just another day in Paradise
Also, unlike the USA, the Russians still have the capability to send a human into space.
Big deal. Americans were driving around on the moon taking pictures and collecting souvenirs almost 50 years ago.
Re "Was America ever that great though?" and "great time to be alive there."
The US had freedom of speech, freedom after speech. That was rare considering what communist nations did to people who wanted to read books. Look back at Communist China, the Soviet Union, South America, Africa, Asia, Europe, the UK, at the same time...
Their views on sconce, books, publications, politics, investment, working, jobs and innovation.
Educate populations need investment, support to get products and services to a global market. The freedom in the USA allowed people to try new ideas, products, invest and profit, invest and fail. The best products did well and more investment followed. The failed projects got rejected and not more gov/mil investment like in many failed nations.
Average people in the USA could read books, newspapers, magazines, talk about government, science, arts, culture. Buy books, write books, self publish, write letters about any topic, petition their gov. Read fiction, non fiction, talk about politics without the fear of gov, mil.
The US manufacturing boom was due to US skills and quality education for the best students. People worked hard for their company and new products got created, tested and sold to the world.
The US tested its students on merit. Not social advancement just on political correctness, virtue signalling for students who could not study.
Real exams, real tests over years of competitive education soon found out who could study, would study and could get results.
Only the very best got top scholarships after they could show they could study and pass tests, exams.
The "US manufacturing" gave the world products and services the world wanted to buy into. Not what a gov, theocracy, monarchy, mil, dictatorship, communist gov allowed their people to buy, rationed out, set a product for their nation.
Different parts of the world "sucked" as they could not innovate, publish, create, invent, discuss, share in new science.
They had a gov, mil tell the population what could be studied, published. What tech their nation was going to use, buy into, study and export.
Who would get what jobs and who would get how much money to buy new tooling, hardware, what brands and when.
Thats why the USA kept on winning for decades. The US population was free to think, design, create, be smart, be productive and got rewarded for hard work and having real skills.
The US rewarded skills and innovation with real wealth in the private sector. Investment in new projects was a private sector risk and reward.
Not getting a product right was a pathway to bankruptcy in the USA. No easy bailout by a gov/mil.
Other nations reward their people with food, housing. The USA innovated as other nations stagnated under their own bureaucracies, censorship, communism, faiths, mil, corrupt leaders.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Also, unlike the USA, the Russians still have the capability to send a human into space.
Big deal. Americans were driving around on the moon taking pictures and collecting souvenirs almost 50 years ago.
Exactly. 50 years ago. Not today.
A lot of nations are setting up science departments just to publish, patent and get more rankings for their nations, university.
The result of such created science rankings is then more international students who have to pay for university and their stay in that winning nation to "study"
A lot of nations try that science, patent, university ranking, graduate wage result to sell their many university products. More patents, more publications, more paying students.
Any advance nation can get the count up. Are they innovating? Using a few experts at a top university science campus to churn out academic results with no further investment. No business culture able to invest, take risks on new products and bring the best results to market.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Here's a thought, how about corporation start funding these technology initiatives themselves like their suppose to instead of sucking on the government teet. You know, you could redirect some those profits back into R&D instead of frittering it away on investors. You wanted a free market, started behaving like one.
The father of modern rocketry, Goddard, did his work in the USA, well before WWII.
ASML, Siemens, KUKA to name a few.
I'll give you ASML, but the other two do volume more than anything else; there's nothing particularly special about them other than their popularity with vendors in some niche markets. For example, siemens is popular in conditional access ISO7816 cards for satellite TV, which is no doubt where a lot of their volume comes from, but there's really nothing special about them. They also have a heavy presence in industrial and medical systems, but nothing special technology wise.
If you want to argue that Siemens isn't innovative, I'd probably agree with you--their primary growth strategy (in the US) once upon a time was "buy marketshare" which was a cycle that went: buy small competitor, gain 3% additional marketshare, attempt to "transition" customer to homegrown Siemens product, customer flees to other vendor, repeat. It was very frustrating to work for them, watching your product killed and your dev team die as they shifted the customer base running it to an inferior system.
However, that said, what you argued was:
Pretty much the only big tech company in Europe is Phillips
Siemens is huge. When I worked there we had 400k employees. They're in EVERY market, their product list is gargantuan, and they're entrenched enough that their marketing strategy in Europe is walking into the conference room and saying, "We're Siemens, you will give us your money" and walking out with a sale. THAT was also very frustrating to deal with, since they tried the same strategy in the US in industrial automation and would get laughed out of the room.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
The US had freedom of speech, but it also had McCarthyism and racial segregation. That was my point really, how free you were in the US greatly depended on things like your skin colour and political beliefs.
While there were different issues in Europe, for example, you can't easily make a simple, qualitative comparison of some kind of meaningless "average freedom" for whole populations. All you can do is acknowledge the issues, e.g. most places outlawed homosexuality and that was really bad for a lot of people. For them no country was particularly "great" if it regarded their sexuality as a crime.
By the way, most of the freedoms you describe were available in western Europe from the 1950s onward too. Similar education systems too, although of course like the US there was widespread discrimination.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
USA is also likely still #1 if this rating had to do with "total innovation" instead of being closer to "innovation per capita". The actual Bloomberg research paper is paywalled, but most of the rankings use terminology such as intensity, density, concentration, etc. which probably mean they are trying to prevent countries from dominating the ranking simply because they have more people. Otherwise USA and China would likely be #1 and #2 (with the EU probably being either #1 or #2 if considered as a whole).
When it comes to the actual economic might which is developed through R&D spending and other innovation related activities, population is a huge multiplier though. This is why countries like the US and China will still be the places where most innovation come from for the foreseeable future no matter how well smaller countries perform in rankings such as these.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Not quite. USA got all the German rocket scientists, all the Soviets had were the guys working at the V-2 assembly lines and a couple of less important engineers. This is why the Americans have used a direct V-2 descendant till late 1960ies, launching their first astronauts with it while the Soviets have quickly established their own rocket designs while reusing some engineering solutions from the V-2 for decades (like running the turbopumps on hydrogen peroxide) in unrelated hardware.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Space travel: Wrong
First country to put something in space was Germany.
First country to put something into orbit was the Soviet Union.
The Internet: Correct - USA
iPhones: Complicated. Some of the key designers were foreigners, not to mention it borrowed from Nokia and others quite a bit.
Commercial Space Travel: Correct - USA
Quantum mechanics - Wrong. Europe.
Nuclear bombs - Wrong. Theorized in Europe, developed by European immigrants
Tang - Correct
Google - Correct, though the tech borrows heavily from some Europeans.
You think maybe times have changed? At one time, unskilled laborers were in demand. Today, they are not. We need highly educated workers, not illiterate peasants. Add to this the anti-progressive attitudes of new immigrants and it's a cultural nightmare. They treat women and gays horribly and do not feel any compunction to assimilate into American society. And why should they, when multiculturalism tells them that's the worst thing they could do?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
I thought Tsiolkovsky is the father of modern rocketry.
Actually proportionally Israel is way more popular than the US. Medical tourism to the US is basically an exception.
Here's the actual data: https://www.cihi.ca/sites/defa... The average treatment time for cancer in Canada is less than 20 days. In the US many people simply used to get NO cancer treatment whatsoever.
to what we spent going to the moon? Or what was spent in the run up to WWII? Of what we spent on infrastructure post WWII?
The tax cuts weren't necessarily 'cuts' as you and me understand them but rather tweaks to current laws that let them hide money over seas. This is why Warren Buffet pays less as a percentage than his secretary. This is before we talk about the bail outs, the near zero interest loans to the ultra wealthy (which are used to further move their wealth off books ) and other economic shenanigans that funnel money up to the aristocracy.
What's busting the budget is two things. On the State level it's the manufacturing base going overseas decimating blue collar jobs that folks who can't get a college degree used to occupy. That killed Unions and with it wages and with it the tax base. The only place left to get money was the aristocracy and, well, that's not gonna happen. Not as long as wedge issues & caste systems exist. As for the national level, it's a wars and taking care of the baby boomers that's busting our budget. Everything else is chicken feed.
And when the hell did I say we should balance the budget with taxes? By 'Budget' you mean the national I guess, and We should balance that with single payer healthcare. We could pay off the national _debt_ (forget the deficit) in 10 bloody years with the savings from single payer health care _and_ give everyone health care _and_ compete with Canada for jobs that would shore up the state budgets. Then end the 8 wars (look it up, go watch youtube's Secular Talk) and spend that money on Supply Side economics and throw a few tariffs in to bring back manufacturing jobs & Unions. Problem solved. Your Welcome.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"Western Europe" was not the rest of the world. Different nations in Western Europe had very special investment, banking, taxation and censorship laws for many decades. How a business could be started and the long term hiring practices. Union power and who got a job with no question of productivity, ability. Loans and investment was a risk. Innovation in parts of Western Europe was not seen as a wise investment but as a risky loan. Stagnation, protectionism and state interference set in.
So the US freedoms to read, publish, be published, invest, go bankrupt was rather unique and was what made the USA so great for generations.
Investment, education, publication, science, arts, culture could all be found and enjoyed in the USA. Other nations had total censorship, political control, import restrictions. Different tariffs and laws on the needed new tooling to innovate. A lack of investment and no ability for the private sector to attract the needed investment.
The US could out smart and out pace other nations political controls and government intrusion in the workings of the free market.
Average people in the USA had the freedom to read about advances, buy innovate products and services to actually the profits of their private sector business.
To attract investment, new thinking, the needed graduates, experts and professionals to grow their business.
To find and hire the best graduates who passed their exams on merit. Not on politics, faith or wealth as many other failed nations demanded be taken into consideration.
The US offered its best full scholarships once the person could show they could study and pass tests, exams.
Other nations passed students on been good communists, been loyal to a political party, having the correct faith, the correct politics, political connections.
Freedom of speech, freedom after speech, the freedom to read, freedom to study, freedom to work, freedom to invest, freedom to start a business, the freedom to invest again and again is what made the USA great.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
"A large part of what made America great was that we were open to immigration for 400 years"
For many years, there was still a requirement to be able to support yourself. When my ex-wife immigrated back in 88, we had to prove that I could support her. But let's continue to follow the agenda that policy changes in that direction are all new.
Just another day in Paradise
Okay, but we are getting away from the point here. Comparing the US to other countries is pointless. What matters is if it was great for people living in the US in the 20th century, and I think that clearly for a lot of people it wasn't.
It's all very well saying that the system was a meritocracy, but that kinda sucked if you couldn't apply because of your gender or could only attend the badly funded schools because of your skin colour.
That's the problem with MAGA: it was only great for some people some of the time, and was often dependent on outside influences that can't be reproduced like lack of competition from Europe and East Asia, or the space race.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Except we "lost" the recipe and could not do it again using the method used 50 years ago. We or some other country may in fact send someone to the moon again, but if we do, we will need to figure out how to do it. And some other country may beat us there in the second race. I don't know if we are in fact 11th, generally I think all these lists are BS. But, I would say that the US is no longer the defacto leader in tech like it was when I was growing up in the 60s/70s.
They require too many steps & layers, and don't support SQL well enough.
Table-ized A.I.
And where do the machines come from to make these wafers?
Given Intel's research budget and patent portfolio and number of US locations I'm inclined to suspect that much of the main components of their new wafer fabs are designed in the US. If you have information contrary to this, I would be interested in hearing it.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Also, unlike the USA, the Russians still have the capability to send a human into space.
Big deal. Americans were driving around on the moon taking pictures and collecting souvenirs almost 50 years ago.
Exactly. 50 years ago. Not today.
Been there, done that. Yet you believe other nations are innovating when they haven't caught up to where the Americans were 50 years ago. Let me know when they send someone there and bring back the American flag. For extra credit have them do it using 1969 technology.
approximately zero rich Americans leave the country for major medical treatments.
Only if you mean 1.4 million when you say "approximately zero".
Nothing in that article mentions how many "rich" Americans go overseas for medical care. It includes all Americans, including the over 10 million Americans without medical insurance.
Also note that the top two reasons to leave the country are cosmetic surgery and dentistry, two areas where insurance coverage is very low in the US.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
It's even more complex. WWI saw a similar advantage for the USA, most of Europe along with what would become the Commonwealth lost most of a generation of young men and likewise the WWII deaths included most of a generation of young men.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
And the USSR had rovers driving around the Moon 50 years ago and even sent robots that returned with lunar soil samples.
Remembering how far behind the USSR was in 1917 and/or in 1945 after losing 13.7% of its population and lots of infrastructure in WWII, it's quite amazing how well they did. The USA had a huge advantage going into the space race.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
And the USSR had rovers driving around the Moon 50 years ago and even sent robots that returned with lunar soil samples.
Remembering how far behind the USSR was in 1917 and/or in 1945 after losing 13.7% of its population and lots of infrastructure in WWII, it's quite amazing how well they did. The USA had a huge advantage going into the space race.
Sure. But no humans. This was about humans in space.
Agree though that the Soviets had some great scientists working under very difficult conditions.
All considered, the USA was much luckier then the Soviets. Even Kennedy getting shot was good luck for the Moon program. Would the government of stayed as focused without the inspiration from him or would it have turned out more like today where every change in government causes NASA to refocus on different developments? Even the Apollo 1 fire was lucky in a way as it showed how complacent the American engineers were getting and forced much better engineering without which a manned ship would probably have been lost for the same reasons as the Apollo 1 fire, meanwhile the Soviets also got complacent and screwed up their big fucking rocket.
Also remember that the USA had a huge lead in industrial capacity coming out of WWII over the Soviets as well as some good German rocket engineers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Innovation is one of the most sensible things to measure per capita, because innovation doesn't come from countries, it comes from heads, the etymological root of 'capita.' Just because yours doesn't function doesn't mean that the metric doesn't make complete sense.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
What % goes to college now? What % graduates? What were those #s in the 50s-70s?
Moron.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Siemens is, more or less, euro GE. Neither is very innovative, more evolutionary, in technology. Working mostly in mature fields.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Bosch IS a mega-corp with many unrelated arms. Some of those arms are world class, some just label and market chinese made junk.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Defining what is atomic, what are keys, relationships etc is the schema.
I don't know what you want beyond what a dozen RAD tools do for you. Sure Rose builds some ugly code, but it does what you ask. Access does what you ask. DBase3 did what you ask.
The real problem is giving those kinds of tools to people that don't have a clue about database design. Causes problems left and right.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Israel lets rich people pay for organs. There have been huge scandals regarding how some of those organs are procured.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
If it folded 2 years later, they kept R&D open far too _long_.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
As for being a team player, what makes you think anybody wants to "play on your team"?
Er... they cash their paycheck?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
GE was basically the American version of Siemens. I guess arguably it still is. Everything from light bulbs to medical devices to gigantic power plants. And let's not forget financial services (although that is less that it has been). The similarities are astounding. Hell, they're even getting investigated by the authorities, just like Siemens was 12 years ago. They really did copy everything!
First, and still only.
Because the first trip showed that the body was lifeless, inert, and relatively uninteresting. Nobody need "waste" money duplicating the effort. Put up satellites. Look to Mars. But, unless someone is proposing a permanent colony on the Moon, there's no reason to go back.
Learn to love Alaska
New immigrants have a history of treating woman and gays like shit, forming their own enclaves and refusing to integrate. My city still has a little Italy, a little Ukraine, a China town and so on. It has always been the kids or grandkids that assimilated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
" In the US many people simply used to get NO cancer treatment whatsoever."
That's a lie. My mom and dad (twice), and three of my employees have all been treated here for cancer. My aunt in Ontario was put on a waiting list for a couple months. So yeah, anecdotes != evidence, but your comment on the US is bunk.
Just another day in Paradise
But that is the strength of America, there is a 'platform' in place where people with talent can acquire resources to develop widgets and allow the investors/inventors the opportunity to sell them and make money. To my knowledge, not many other countries have less interference than America for creating something new, and allowing the stakeholders to profit from it.
"Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
This isn't a ranking of past innovation. It is a ranking of current investment in innovation. The US has been underinvesting in R&D, infrastructure, education, etc. for many years and it keeps getting worse. Expect our ability to innovate to continue eroding until we realize the importance of investing in our future.
Man, you really need that seminar!
I think these comments, and the AC who mentions Tsiolkovsky highlight the problem with trying to point to where something began.
Innovation or invention that doesn't build on the work of others is rare.
I drew a line at 'first man made object in space', but as you have both pointed out, that wouldn't have been possible without the work of those who went before.
Late reply, but I wanted to say thank you - my knowledge of the USSR space program is incomplete and mostly from the post-WWII era. It was interesting to read the link you provided and to follow on from there.
I don't know if you listen to the current ranting and raving in the MSM, they'd say this number was way too low.
Yes, but you can arrive at those organically. DR automatically generates unique row ID's. If you reference such in another table, you have "created" a relationship without explicitly creating a relationship: Create On Use.
Code generation has problems that data or meta-data driven processing doesn't. Creation of code is usually far easier than maintenance (change) of such code. Generation usually does not help the maintenance side, and often makes it worse. (DR is not really about front-ends, I'd note.)
As far as DBase3, it had its own query language, not SQL. While SQL has weak spots, it's the de-facto standard, and makes the learning curve smaller because many already know traditional RDBMS. (I'd choose SMEQL as the new query language standard if given a choice, but that's another topic.)
I used DBase a lot in the past. It got most of the its RAD capability by integrating the query language, programming language, and front-end conventions, NOT from dynamicy, which it really didn't have. That is indeed one path to RAD, but that requires integrating a full stack (UI, biz-logic, database). DR just focuses on the database and query side. A full stack could be built around it, but that's Stage 2.
Just because some people abuse a tool is not a reason to not have it. A lot of people mis-use chainsaws, but in the right hands they are powerful and efficient tools.
Also, many customers don't really know what they want until they actually use the system. The "static" database tools don't handle changing-minds well. And DR allows gradual cleaning and applying integrity settings at a later time in a project when it settles.
Table-ized A.I.
Ever hear of public health statistics? The US is mediocre at best. The best US medical care is really, really good, and if everyone had access to good medical care we'd have much better public health stats.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Don't forget physicists going to Wall Street to figure out ways to make slightly more money for their employers.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The Soviet Union was first to launch a satellite and first to put a person in orbit (the first two Mercury launches were sub-orbital).
You got that right.
Not a technical innovation, and other countries have also done very well at design.
The division between government and commercial is blurred in some countries with good space exploration records. However, Space-X is doing some good innovating.
How is this supposed to be predominantly US? The big names in starting it are European. US scientists have done a lot of good work, but so have scientists of many countries.
The general idea of the Hiroshima bomb was known in advance. The reason the US had them first was because the US was able to put tons of resources into development. The Nagasaki bomb could be considered innovation by a group of scientists from the US and Europe (lots of Europeans).
Um huh? That level of innovation comes from all over.
Running on the CERN-invented web. The US has shown a lot of innovation here.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I don't think so.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
The first human in space was Yuri Gagarin.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Apple's ARM cores are not designed by ARM, they're designed by Apple. Apple has an architecture license, allowing them to create completely independent implementations of the ARM ISA. Quite a few of ARM's high-end designs come from Austin (I think the A72 was from that team, for example).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
The first human in space was Yuri Gagarin.
Yes, Yuri was the first human in space, beating the Americans by a couple of months.
He didn't land on the moon, drive around in a lunar rover, and come back.
Keep up.
Ah, so putting a human on a rocket and sending him into orbit isn't as innovative as building a bigger rocket and sending three people further?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Ah, so putting a human on a rocket and sending him into orbit isn't as innovative as building a bigger rocket and sending three people further?
That's a pretty dumb question. If the Soviets had been innovative enough to send a human to the moon, give him a car to drive around in, and a ship to come back home in, they certainly would have. They didn't do it then, and no country has done it since the Americans did it.
And your snap judgement in the first few minutes of a job interview are enough for you to figure all this complicated stuff out.
Okay, so you're looking at a bigger rocket with a bigger payload sent further out, carrying other things. Are you really saying that was more innovative and game-changing than putting Yuri Gagarin in orbit?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
While I agree with this sentiment overall, something I'd like to point out: you're the wealthiest country at the moment, and will remain so for another decade or so at least, China's inevitably going to bypass you on grounds of size, but in terms of per capita GDP you're going to remain on the top.
Keep in mind I'm not comparing the US to any one country in Europe, rather I'm comparing it to the whole EU.
Oh, and...
Similar examples can be found elsewhere in tech. You took up CPUs; the first commercially manufactured microprocessor by Intel, the Intel 4004, was designed under the lead of Frederico Faggin [wikipedia.org], an Italian. 2 indian engineers, Vinod Dham [wikipedia.org] and Rajeev Chandtasekhar [wikipedia.org] were part of the core team that developed the 486 chip. And so on.
Keep in mind that I'm talking about recent times, as this penis size comparison began by ranking of the US at #11. If we want to go by raw innovation, and in recent times, the US would be #1 with China at a distant #2.
Okay, so you're looking at a bigger rocket with a bigger payload sent further out, carrying other things. Are you really saying that was more innovative and game-changing than putting Yuri Gagarin in orbit?
No. It was a bigger multi-stage rocket carrying:
- 3 astronauts from the Earth to the moon
- Another spacecraft to land 2 of the astronauts on the moon while the command module orbited the moon
- A vehicle to travel on the moon
- The lander craft launched them from the moon
- The lander craft docked with the orbiting command module
- And the command module returned them safely to earth
I guess by your way of thinking an F-35 is as innovative as a biplane. After all, they both have wings.
Heck, the biplane even has 2 of them.
In other words, a more complicated payload. The moon missions could not have been done without a tremendous amount of innovation to build on. Much of what you're describing is mechanics. There's no fundamental difference between sending a cosmonaut into orbit and three astronauts to the moon.
F-35 engines are greatly different from biplane engines,even a late biplane like the Italian CR.42 (which never went into production because even the Italians realized by then that using biplanes as fighters was stupid). Saturn V engines are different from whatever Gagarin used in detail, not principle. There were far more steps between an early biplane fighter (Nieuport 17?) and an F-35. There's far more innovation from the number of steps.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
In other words, a more complicated payload. The moon missions could not have been done without a tremendous amount of innovation to build on. Much of what you're describing is mechanics. There's no fundamental difference between sending a cosmonaut into orbit and three astronauts to the moon.
It's engineering, not mechanics. If the Russians could have gone to the moon they certainly would have.
Every time you see the word "first" on this list it is by definition an innovation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I recall when SpaceX first successfully landed a first stage rocket, and they shouted USA! USA! USA! internet forums, including slashdot, were being raged at by people abroad saying that it wasn't just the USA that did that...only, it was just the USA. SpaceX is 100% domestic, and the company that paid for the launch is also a US company.
It would have been much more appropriate had SpaceX achieved that success in line with and not in spite of US Government's involvement in spaceflight. Maybe they should have been shouting "California!" instead?
Ezekiel 23:20
All those people you name... if they did it in the US they're American.
So in fifty years, they'll be Chinese by the same logic.
The United States has already won the global culture war.
One could perhaps say that Germany won it for the US...
Ezekiel 23:20