3 ms·
Siri was an inferior product comparing to others not funded by government (even after Apple took over). So that is not a glorious example of Government funding.
by afsina 10y ago
Siri was an inferior product comparing to others not funded by government (even after Apple took over). So that is not a glorious example of Government funding. Government is extremely ineffective, and most funds are waste. But sure some stuff will appear from all that loot.
- timClicks 10y agoInefficient != ineffective. If you're accessing a resource via the Internet, you're testament that public funding of R&D can work.
- supremesaboteur 10y agoThat was not what the parent was saying. US Government spends large amount of money every year. They are bound to make some things work. Private sector makes some things work also. So, the question is : 'which should be preferred' ? If you agree that government spending is less efficient in making things work, you should prefer private spending. Unless you believe there are things private spending cannot do which is a reasonable case to demand public funding for research. For example, some argue that the quarter-to-quarter nature of how private companies operate precludes them from making investment in long running research. But companies like Google do run multi-year research projects.
- petra 10y agoDARPA doesn't spend that much money, a few billions a year , and has a pretty good track record , probably better than most corporations .
- Pica_soO 10y agoYes, i mean, its not like a company locked the telephone away because they feared a damage to their gramophone disc sales. That would be shortsighted madness, company's are incapable off, if you read the history books released by their PR-Departments.