• voracitude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I’ve got news for you: historically, “centralised” research has led to fewer innovations in consumer technology and bureaucrats unilaterally redirecting funds away from promising areas for political reasons. For just two examples: Cybernetics was the target of a political campaign in the USSR, and their biologists denied genetics of all things and tried to promote agricultural policy based on genetics being wrong.

    Alternatively, we could just look at where the USSR is now to see how well their centralised research and development efforts are going 👀

    • sibachian@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      your example is irrelevant and makes little sense as a counter when all research and innovation globally is still paid for by taxes. no business will spend billions on new ideas, they spend billions on commercial application of public (tax paid) ideas in order to profit.

    • ShepherdPie
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      You could even lump giant US corporations into that group too. Companies like IBM innovated less and less the larger they got. You can’t expect constant innovation from a singular machine that runs the same all the time.