Comment by crazygringo | Hacker News Reader

Comment by crazygringo | Hacker News Reader

> And that's one of the key reasons why China has been able to catch up... he thinks the US is still ahead of China in tech innovation, for now. But that the gap is narrowing fast.

Which is awesome.

Because framing it as "ahead" or a "gap" is completely backwards. Innovation isn't a competition or zero-sum game.

Innovation coming out of China benefits the world, just like innovation coming out of the US does. What matters is the total.

How about we be thankful that there are now so many more scientists the world over contributing to research and knowledge? How amazing is that for the human race?

Now, if there's an article that actually proves US innovation is slowing compared to itself in the past somehow, that actually measures total results rather than government-funded inputs (e.g. including private funding and taking impact/effectiveness into account, not just # of papers published)... then I'd be very interested in that.

But this article isn't that. This article is just cheap nationalism. Ugh.

Whatever you're position happens to be, you can't pretend like we're all in this innovating together for the betterment of humankind. China and the US have very different ideologies and are opposing forces in global geopolitics. There are a lot of people, both inside the US and outside, that would prefer to see the US continue to be the most innovative country, so Schmidt's perspective is relevant and informative, not just cheap nationalism.

But what do ideologies/forces have to do with it?

The article uses published scientific papers as an example. That's open. That's research results the US is getting for free, from China. Which is awesome!

The only way I can interpret your comment as making sense is if we were talking solely about military innovation -- innovation in China's navies, in its air force, in its missiles, or even its ability to hack and disrupt foreign networks.

But Schmidt clearly isn't talking about that, he's talking about basic scientific and engineering research.

I don't disagree there are people who see it as a competition and want to see the US "win", but that is cheap nationalism to me. Because the fact is, the more research that gets done, the more everybody wins.

Even if it's not the intention, why don't you think that research is, indeed, ultimately resulting in the betterment of humankind? Isn't that what progress is?

Here's another way to think about it: producing research is like producing anything else, like iPhones. The world is better off because China has the manufacturing capacity to churn out iPhones cheaper and better than anyone else. Which benefits us all. Because it's not a competition -- it's progress.

Is it awesome? The Chinese government has such power over the people and businesses innovating that there could be significant implications for Chinese citizens, neighboring countries, and the world. Where innovation happens first and how closely it's held affects so much. Your comment strikes me as dangerously optimistic.

Funny really to say this when the USA is backed by corporations, which flows directly into its core government.

China is a huge country with a non-democratic ideology. And it works immensly well - just look at all the US corporations which has invested heavily in chineese labor.

Oh, and btw. China own what... 20% of US?

China has a very democratic ideology, you just don’t see it from the outside.

> US innovation is slowing compared to itself in the past somehow, that actually measures total results rather than government-funded inputs

Schmidt might say you’re missing the point: government funded science is a leading indicator of future results because the government is the largest body investing in and sharing the results of basic, foundational, non-product research in the weirdest variety of subjects. Turn that off and you turn off the fountain from which innovations can be productized.

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/who-should-fund...

> [in 2017] the federal government funded less than half of all basic research in the country for the first time since World War II.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/03/trump-once-again-req...

> [2019:] For the third year in a row, President Donald Trump’s administration has unveiled a budget request to Congress that calls for deep spending cuts at many federal science agencies, including a 13% cut for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and a 12% cut for the National Science Foundation (NSF)

Cutting funding for the NSF is and will continue to decelerate the pace of innovation because the basic research is no longer being done.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com