alt Hacker NewsUSA is still one of the top countries for scientists. Just as an example Europe had a few years of exporting the best GLP-1 drugs (finally something in which Europe was leader in science), Eli Lily quickly took it over.
In software San Francisco is still the top for AI research: even when Peter Steinberger didn't know what he will do with OpenClaw, it was clear to him that the only place to move to was USA.
Terrence Tao was a good example of what happens when an exceptionally smart person stops getting funded by an American University: not moving to another country, but got VC money and created a new company.
USA politics is looked at so closely, because it matters and changes and still more democratic than most countries in the world even though democracy is a mess (as it's supposed to be).
Replies
I fled SF and I know a bunch of similar people. Startups are still founded there for the address, not the local talent pool. The address is there because of inertia, not because of inherent advantage. If I were to create a startup I wouldn't even consider doing it in SF now. It is a waste of money that could be put towards the idea. The US is clearly on an ant-intellectual path. People default to here because of inertia but every attack on immigrants, every high level decision based on quack science and personal gain and every attack on our institutions supporting the development of the next generation is putting inertia elsewhere. It is clear as day that the US is only keeping any kind of advantage right now due to inertia and threat and not innovation and effort.
>In software San Francisco is still the top for AI research
What was the last thing that a major US Lab published? It's all trade secrets.
Chinese labs are the only ones publishing results as they happen.
The US is in the position it was for semiconductor manufacturing, first it was labs and open science. Then by the 80s fabs started costing millions and universities stopped being able to contribute and nothing got published.
Now it's getting to trillions and if Intel goes under there is no one in the US who knows how to make any semiconductor generation newer than 2010.
Terrence Tao expressed sentiments are at odds with you and which align with the article:
> The U.S. used to be sort of the default, the no brainer, option. If you got an offer from a top U.S. university, this was like almost the best thing that could happen to you as an academic ... If it's just a less welcoming, atmosphere for science in general here, the best and brightest may not automatically come to the US as they have for decades.
I have visited USA but I never liked it enough to want to live there due to the culture being too extroverted for me. I moved to Singapore and like it a lot.
I don't think USA is a bad place, probably the best for your career but I don't see myself enjoying living there too much, although maybe I am generalizing because I only visited New York and SF.
I'm not sure how making a copycat "me-too" drug, after one was successfully developed shows how innovative a country or company is?
This is a lagging indicator, it is still one of the top no question, but the point is that is shifting materially.
I find the Peter mention funny because some of the other reasons he said it made sense to move to SF were that labor laws in Europe wouldn’t allow him to work 6-7 days a week, and he’d have to focus more on safety/responsibility in mind in Europe.
He’s moving from London after all, arguably the global AI research hub.
(Also likely SA told him the offer was contingent on him relocating)
> Terrence Tao was a good example of what happens when an exceptionally smart person stops getting funded by an American University: not moving to another country, but got VC money and created a new company.
That is the intent of these government policies: Shift power and resources to powerful, wealthy private individuals (and their companies). Is Tao doing research?
> even when Peter Steinberger didn't know what he will do with OpenClaw, it was clear to him that the only place to move to was USA
We don't know how much OpenAI offered him, but I would bet big that it was enough to get most people to relocate across country lines. [To level-set: we know Meta was offering $100m pay packages to researchers who had not already released something like OpenClaw.]
> Just as an example Europe had a few years of exporting the best GLP-1 drugs (finally something in which Europe was leader in science), Eli Lily quickly took it over
You make it sound like Europe was not a leader in any area of science until this one thing which they led in for a few years.
> Terrence Tao was a good example of what happens when an exceptionally smart person stops getting funded by an American University: not moving to another country, but got VC money and created a new company
No, he's an example of what can happen when a Fields medalist gets funding cut. 99% of exceptionally smart university mathematicians and scientists will not be able to get VC money.
With the US both cutting research funding and becoming unfriendly to foreign students many future Tao's that would have chosen a US school for grad school will likely look elsewhere.