Reply to: Brexit Dividend: Dominic Cummings wants to create a “British Google”

[TheGreenBastard]

Oh yes it does. eg: Open source software strategy | European Commission

Considering that companies such as Microsoft will give away their OS for free to corporates in exchange for paid support contracts, it is not dissimilar in the way that open source works.

It'd be interesting if it was feasible to measure open source contributions, no doubt the US decimates everyone else on that measure along with everything else tech related.

"EU" being "pro" open source is in no small part a move against US tech dominance, would it cannibalise its own market if Microsoft was a EU company?

[Paddy]

US tech is 10x bigger than the best Europe has to offer. And open source does not really count...

Oh yes it does. eg: Open source software strategy | European Commission

Considering that companies such as Microsoft will give away their OS for free to corporates in exchange for paid support contracts, it is not dissimilar in the way that open source works.

[_V_]

Agreed in principle however Spotify is Swedish, here are some chart type thingies:





Don't forget that Linux is also, originally, Finnish...

US tech is 10x bigger than the best Europe has to offer. And open source does not really count...

[Paddy]

The likes of Ceefax and Apricot were years before the web came along, that era is irrelevant now. If you can come up with a list of successful UK tech startups that grew into companies with sizeable revenues then the list is quite short. You've only got to look at the FTSE100 and see how few tech companies ever made it into that index. Compare that to the USA which has NASDAQ, an entire index just for tech. A few weeks ago, Apple alone was worth more than the entire FTSE100.

The big challenge is that the UK and other European countries lack the scale to create new digital platforms that could go head to head with the US and China. Personally I find it hard to imagine that the UK will ever come up with a company like Facebook, Google, Air BnB, Tesla or Uber. Even with our amazing music and broadcasting heritage, we couldn't come up with anything like a Spotify or Netflix. Instead we've nailed our colours to the FinTech mast. A lot of digital banking and payments platforms have been created but it remains to be seen if any will become major global players.

Not so, CompuServe had Internet connectivity from 1989; I used it on daily basis. £00.01 per page plus BT charges.

[darmstadt]

The likes of Ceefax and Apricot were years before the web came along, that era is irrelevant now. If you can come up with a list of successful UK tech startups that grew into companies with sizeable revenues then the list is quite short. You've only got to look at the FTSE100 and see how few tech companies ever made it into that index. Compare that to the USA which has NASDAQ, an entire index just for tech. A few weeks ago, Apple alone was worth more than the entire FTSE100.

The big challenge is that the UK and other European countries lack the scale to create new digital platforms that could go head to head with the US and China. Personally I find it hard to imagine that the UK will ever come up with a company like Facebook, Google, Air BnB, Tesla or Uber. Even with our amazing music and broadcasting heritage, we couldn't come up with anything like a Spotify or Netflix. Instead we've nailed our colours to the FinTech mast. A lot of digital banking and payments platforms have been created but it remains to be seen if any will become major global players.

Agreed in principle however Spotify is Swedish, here are some chart type thingies:





Don't forget that Linux is also, originally, Finnish...

[edison]

I don't believe the UK has done badly, I believe, as usual the UK started out well but the lack of government support and in cases government obstructions has affected the UK IT industry.

Apricot-ACT were far ahead in computer innovation even ahead of the IBM using micro-channel for the PS/2. At that time (late 80s early 90s) The UK was way ahead with Prestel, Cefax etc in the mid to late 80s. I could book airline seats in the 80s using CPM and a modem.

It got to the stage that ACT needed huge investments to compete with IBM, the only offer came from Mitsubishi which sucked up all the inactivation and took it to Japan selling off the designs to Toshiba and alike.

The UK fell way behind with IT data comms because of BT intransigence. By the time of year 2000, mainland Europe were way ahead with Internet links and the UK was still on dial-up.

These are just a couple of examples; the UK has good innovation due to clever and enthusiastic individualises but there is lack of investment because inverters want to make a quick buck rather than investing in the future.

The likes of Ceefax and Apricot were years before the web came along, that era is irrelevant now. If you can come up with a list of successful UK tech startups that grew into companies with sizeable revenues then the list is quite short. You've only got to look at the FTSE100 and see how few tech companies ever made it into that index. Compare that to the USA which has NASDAQ, an entire index just for tech. A few weeks ago, Apple alone was worth more than the entire FTSE100.

The big challenge is that the UK and other European countries lack the scale to create new digital platforms that could go head to head with the US and China. Personally I find it hard to imagine that the UK will ever come up with a company like Facebook, Google, Air BnB, Tesla or Uber. Even with our amazing music and broadcasting heritage, we couldn't come up with anything like a Spotify or Netflix. Instead we've nailed our colours to the FinTech mast. A lot of digital banking and payments platforms have been created but it remains to be seen if any will become major global players.

[_V_]

Totally agree. The UK's record for financially successful tech innovation in the internet era is really quite lame when you think back to our past academic, science and engineering history.

A big part of Silicon Valley's unique success is cultural - Americans have a greater appetite for risk and this is especially true of investors. Venture capital is usually plentiful, especially in later rounds of funding.

Another reason why the UK has done relatively badly is the poor commercialisation of research and innovation coming from our top universities like Oxford, Cambridge and Imperial. Compare these to MIT and Stanford for example.

Silicon Valley had a couple of decades head start on most other countries. The concentration of capital and start up know-how attracts the brightest and the best from all over the world. So many major industrialised countries have tried to copy it but got nowhere close. Israel, despite it's relatively small size, is perhaps one of the best successes and with much of it's startup system related to defence spending, resembles the US model.

Spot on.

[Zigenare]

I don't believe the UK has done badly, I believe, as usual the UK started out well but the lack of government support and in cases government obstructions has affected the UK IT industry.

Apricot-ACT were far ahead in computer innovation even ahead of the IBM using micro-channel for the PS/2. At that time (late 80s early 90s) The UK was way ahead with Prestel, Cefax etc in the mid to late 80s. I could book airline seats in the 80s using CPM and a modem.

It got to the stage that ACT needed huge investments to compete with IBM, the only offer came from Mitsubishi which sucked up all the inactivation and took it to Japan selling off the designs to Toshiba and alike.

The UK fell way behind with IT data comms because of BT intransigence. By the time of year 2000, mainland Europe were way ahead with Internet links and the UK was still on dial-up.

These are just a couple of examples; the UK has good innovation due to clever and enthusiastic individualises but there is lack of investment because inverters want to make a quick buck rather than investing in the future.

Did you type that tulipe on your phone?

[Paddy]

Totally agree. The UK's record for financially successful tech innovation in the internet era is really quite lame when you think back to our past academic, science and engineering history.

A big part of Silicon Valley's unique success is cultural - Americans have a greater appetite for risk and this is especially true of investors. Venture capital is usually plentiful, especially in later rounds of funding.

Another reason why the UK has done relatively badly is the poor commercialisation of research and innovation coming from our top universities like Oxford, Cambridge and Imperial. Compare these to MIT and Stanford for example.

Silicon Valley had a couple of decades head start on most other countries. The concentration of capital and start up know-how attracts the brightest and the best from all over the world. So many major industrialised countries have tried to copy it but got nowhere close. Israel, despite it's relatively small size, is perhaps one of the best successes and with much of it's startup system related to defence spending, resembles the US model.

I don't believe the UK has done badly, I believe, as usual the UK started out well but the lack of government support and in cases government obstructions has affected the UK IT industry.

Apricot-ACT were far ahead in computer innovation even ahead of the IBM using micro-channel for the PS/2. At that time (late 80s early 90s) The UK was way ahead with Prestel, Cefax etc in the mid to late 80s. I could book airline seats in the 80s using CPM and a modem.

It got to the stage that ACT needed huge investments to compete with IBM, the only offer came from Mitsubishi which sucked up all the inactivation and took it to Japan selling off the designs to Toshiba and alike.

The UK fell way behind with IT data comms because of BT intransigence. By the time of year 2000, mainland Europe were way ahead with Internet links and the UK was still on dial-up.

These are just a couple of examples; the UK has good innovation due to clever and enthusiastic individualises but there is lack of investment because inverters want to make a quick buck rather than investing in the future.

[edison]

Similar sentiment on the continent: France is ditching Google to reclaim its online independence | WIRED UK

It will never happen, Europeans (Brits included) arrogantly think they can create the environment that exists in SV, they can't, for a multitude of reasons.

Totally agree. The UK's record for financially successful tech innovation in the internet era is really quite lame when you think back to our past academic, science and engineering history.

A big part of Silicon Valley's unique success is cultural - Americans have a greater appetite for risk and this is especially true of investors. Venture capital is usually plentiful, especially in later rounds of funding.

Another reason why the UK has done relatively badly is the poor commercialisation of research and innovation coming from our top universities like Oxford, Cambridge and Imperial. Compare these to MIT and Stanford for example.

Silicon Valley had a couple of decades head start on most other countries. The concentration of capital and start up know-how attracts the brightest and the best from all over the world. So many major industrialised countries have tried to copy it but got nowhere close. Israel, despite it's relatively small size, is perhaps one of the best successes and with much of it's startup system related to defence spending, resembles the US model.

[Mordac]

So that's why AtW has gone quiet...nudge nudge, wink wink...

[TheGreenBastard]

About Mojeek - building the world's alternative search engine

If the website's traffic conveys people's value of the service, then Mojeek isn't doing very well.

[darmstadt]

About Mojeek - building the world's alternative search engine

[TheGreenBastard]

Interesting reading that, they are saying one of the reasons is the way that Cambridge Analytica (remember them?) used and manipulated data.

Of course the gov(s) don't want companies like CA shaming their intelligence gathering capabilities, they'd much rather have direct control.

[Paddy]

Interesting reading past the headline, the claim that Brexit will mean we can use state subsidies to boost the tech sector is another piece of misinformation. The EU rules already appear to allow us to do what Cummings wants to do, and France and Germany both spend far more on it than we do already without falling foul of the EU.

What you can't do is spend indefinitely to prop up a failing business. What you can do is support R&D with clear spending plans that aren't just a wasteful open check book.

Got a five year plan spend £1b to support businesses to develop the underlying tech to create a rival to Google? Crack on.

Want to spend £200m a year indefinitely to subsidise a business that would otherwise fail without it? Nope, can't do that.

It will be tax payers' money going into a black-hole belonging to Cummings' mates offshore companies. In any other country they would call it corruption and be protesting on the streets.