How Britain ceased to be a computing superpower | Hacker News Reader

How Britain ceased to be a computing superpower

telegraph.co.uk

32 pointsshaftoe44439 comments

One major cause was the policy of defunding education and research. A policy the Telegraph championed and campaigned for.

Another was Brexit (literally sold as "the British people have had enough of experts"). Another colossal mistake the Telegraph pushed for, defended and now finds itself making excuses for.

There is a certain dialogue around the desire to have nothing to do with "green energy" lately as well (another policy the Telegraph championed and campaigned for).

I get that some technology can be dangerous - but this is wind turbines, solar panels or fart powered electricty. They might not be the best option for everyone, but to not persue any innovation that you can then sell to the rest of the world just seems dumb. Its that same sort of fear that led the uk to abandoning its headstart in computers.

In 10 years they'll ask why we are importing all out wind turbines and solar panels from China...

The country that pushed Turing to madness but let Jimmy Saville grow old.

Anyway Europe dedicated all it's resources to two world wars which left the field open for America. Thankfully 1000 years of culture means we haven't been completely subsumed by them.

The reality is the technology industry has become heavily privatised, and privatisation means sales, and good engineers aren't interested in sales, but funding is required to build things... So, you need companies or governments with a long-term mindset, which isn't easy to come by. So instead you get entrepreneurs with borderline-capable engineering abilities, and typically businesses who think of short-term profits, and the end result is gimmicky 'products' rather than breakthrough inventions.

Note however, that there is greater room for complacency in the public sector, given the endless pool of money (via taxes, inflation), whereas the private sector is more touch-and-go and can be more competitive.

So I guess it is about balancing the public/private sectors optimally, which is ambiguous as to how to do. By the way I didn't read the article.

Things are difficult when you can’t just steal from other nations

I miss the days where the British Empire was just stealing supercomputers from Africa. /s

Same for USSR and then Russia. When they were deprived of their Eastern Block colonies, suddenly it is hard to compete with West.

https://archive.ph/mu0pK

Is this just talking specifically about supercomputers/actual compute power? Because otherwise I think it's fair to say that Britain is still a computing superpower. Deepmind alone is at the forefront of its domain.

It's a shame (I guess?) to drop down the super-computing rankings, but personally I don't equate "supercomputing power" with "computing superpower".

Is this an adjunction, perhaps?

Opening sentence:

>Britain has fallen behind Russia and China in the global supercomputing race and has a short window to catch-up, the Government has been warned.

I like how subtle the propaganda is here. Or maybe it's not subtle?

What propaganda? That it would be nice if Britain wasn't being beaten in the supercomputing industry by a totalitarian dictatorship and warmongering dictatorship? As a Brit, I think it's just common sense rather than propaganda.

What exactly makes democracies better than "totalitarian dictatorships" and "warmongering dictatorships" at supercomputing so that it's such a shame that Britain is being beaten by China and Russia?

> What exactly makes democracies better than "totalitarian dictatorships" and "warmongering dictatorships"

Freedom, human rights?

Doesn’t even have to be about super computers.

It is, though.

This is such a convoluted question that I am not even sure if you are asking something in good faith.

Anyway: democracies should try not to lose technological races against authoritarian states. I certainly don't want either Russia or China to dominate at anything even remotely usable for warfare.

But it’s ok for Americans and British to have invaded or bombed more countries than anyone else?

As long as the invading country is a democracy or a flawed democracy, then it’s ok and justified right?

Ps. Don’t mistake me as a war supporter. I do not support any war.

Wanting to be wealthy and competent is dangerously right wing.

Wanting to be competent is definitely not right wing.

Remember "we have had enough of experts"?

Because this is often tendentiously quoted without context, here's what Gove actually said:

> “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts with organisations with acronyms saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong.”

His problem is not with experts, but with people who claim the authority of experts without the track record or ability to justify that claim, i.e. people who are wrong most of the time, but expect you to believe them unquestioningly anyway. I'm sure we can all think of examples.

Yep. Gove for one. Truss?

Essentially the current makeup of the Tories. They all claim to know what's best whilst making everything worse.

I'm trying to think of any examples where reputable authorities made statements that the government followed because it was the right thing to do, and wasn't a made up group from a Tory sponsor who was parroting the party line, and it was wrong.

On one hand I agree.

On the other hand, no one cares about science and tech unless <generic boggyman> might be beating us at it!

Media headline when US makes a breakthrough: "Fusion energy breakthrough achieved, paving way for cheap energy for everyone".

Media headline when China makes a breakthrough: "China achieves fusion breakthrough, could allow China to dominate the world"

Media headline in China when China makes a breakthrough: "Fusion energy breakthrough achieved, paving way for cheap energy for everyone".

Media headline in China when US makes a breakthrough: "US achieves fusion breakthrough, could allow US to dominate the world"

Lived in China from 2017-2020. What you described wasn’t true in China but true in western mass media.

I’ve written about how my friends in China were confused why the US was so hostile to China. They didn’t understand. They didn’t have the same negative perception about America as America had of them.

Not sure about now though. Perhaps their perception of America is trending towards negative now that it’s clear to them that America does not like them.

Are you arguing that anti-Western media propaganda doesn't exist in China? Did you by any chance spend your three years in China walking about with a blindfold on?

Have you been to China? Or are you just making this shit up from never having been to China or learned anything about its recent history?

Do you actually think that the level of anti-China propaganda in western media is nearly the same as the level of anti-western propaganda in China over the last 6 years?

How much propaganda did you drink to even reply the way you did?

I'm half basing this on the speeches given by China's top diplomat who always seems on the verge of a brain aneurysm when talking about the west. Do they not play him for local audiences?

When the Dutch PM met with Biden a few months ago ASML was the first talking point on the agenda.

https://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/video/2460251-rutte-en-biden-spreke...

Beating other countries is kind of the point otherwise you end up like Greece.

Of course, in this case the Dutch won by (1) investing for the long term and (2) not stopping when they were one step ahead of <other country>

Those who are first will later be last as Bob Dylan once sang.

The mineshaft gap?

Russia started a war in Europe, after having interferied in UK brexit vote, and China is clearly supporting Russia. Call it propaganda if you want.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com