No, really - EU doesn't have the VCs and the megacorps. People laugh at EU sponsoring projects, but there is no private money to sponsor them. There are plenty of US companies with sites in the EU though, so you have people working the problems, but no branding.
Maybe, or maybe when silicon valley was busy growing exponentially Europe was still picking itself up from the mess of ww2.
Trying to blame a single reason is futile, naive and childish.
Moneywise, the US does have the good old Exorbitant Privilege to lean on.
The U.S. has a debt of 35Tn. The entire EU around 16Tn.
If even 10% of the debt difference was invested in tech that would have meant about $2tn more in investment in EU tech.
It's fascinating watching people circle back to this answer.
Regulation and taxation reduces incentives. Lower incentives, means lower risk-taking.
The fact this is still a lesson that needs to be debated is absurd.
And given what happened in Austria just a few hours back, not the best time for your comment.
Yes, the US has a lot of school shootings, but does anyone think loose gun regulations are why the US is strong on tech?
Great, Singapore has less school shootings and homeless people than anywhere in Europe by a country mile and has a soaring economy.
They make Europe look like Texas.
If you said you can look at the state of VC funding in the US and call it anything approximating "smart risks" I don't know that I'd believe you.
EU is not a business-friendly environment.
Longer term: cultural and language divisions despite attempts at creating a common market, not running the global reserve currency/military hegemony, social democracies encouraging work-life balance over cutthroat careerism, demographic issues, not getting a boost from being the only consumer economy not to be leveled in WW2, etc.