6 ms·
Well, competition isn't the only incentive that can drive innovation though. In the case of public research, it can do quite the opposite.
by tnzn 8y ago
Well, competition isn't the only incentive that can drive innovation though. In the case of public research, it can do quite the opposite.
- da02 8y agoCan you expand on this? This sounds very intriguing.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- tysonzni 8y agoIt sounds like Peter Thiel's argument about how natural monopolies can afford to invest heavily in R&D because they're financially comfortable. And how competitive industries supposedly don't offer the same room for research. I think he's mistaken on this but nonetheless it's a compelling argument in some cases. Here's his essay where he expands on it: https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-losers-1410535536 https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-...
- heartles 8y agoThere's also an argument to be made for Bell labs, back when Bell had a monopoly on the phone lines there were some amazing developments to come out of Bell Labs
- dx034 8y agoThe problem with planes is that research costs for a single product are often above $1bn. So you wouldn't create a new product just because you are curious or have a small team of scientists that discovered an opportunity.