3 ms·

Sure, there's nothing mystical about Shenzhen, and I'm sure it can be replicated elsewhere -- but on a decadal timeframe at best. There are many different fact

by nkoren 8y ago

Sure, there's nothing mystical about Shenzhen, and I'm sure it can be replicated elsewhere -- but on a decadal timeframe at best. There are many different factors which go into producing such an ecosystem. Raw number of STEM graduates is a very crude proxy, but it's probably as good as anything else for representing the "feedstock" of such an ecosystem, and gives an rough indication of how difficult the task might be. China produces ~8x as many STEM graduates as the US. Therefore, all else being equal, if it took China 20 years to develop such an ecosystem, it should take the US roughly 160 years to do the same. "But wait!", you say, "The US can be a fast second-mover, learning from Shenzhen and not repeating its mistakes. Plus, we may have fewer STEM graduates, but on average they're better-educated and more entrepreneurial, which would allow us to move even faster". (Note, I'm not endorsing these claims, just saying that it's an argument one could plausibly make). Fine, granting all that, let's say that each American STEM graduate is worth 10 Chinese STEM graduates. In that case, it would only take 16 years to begin to compete with Shenzhen. That analysis is almost certainly far too generous towards the US, however -- and even if it were well-founded, what American politician would pursue the necessary policies, given a best-case 16-year ROI? And what American polity would accede to the requirements of such policies? Answer: none. This just isn't going to happen in the US. India has the scale to pull it off, but not the organisational capacity; Germany has the organisational capacity but not the scale; most other places have neither. Anybody who thinks that it'd be easy to replace China is utterly fooling themselves.

pathseeker 8y ago
This entire statement is predicated on STEM graduates being a proxy, but you provide no evidence that's the case. Building complex market ecosystems has very little to do with supply of STEM graduates. Having some supply is certainly a prerequisite, but there is no indication that the current supply rate is the prerequisite. I suggest you read the mythical man month, it illustrates the fallacious thinking behind throwing more bodies at projects to get them done faster.
- nkoren 8y ago
  I've read the Mythical Man Month, and it has no bearing on what I'm talking about here. The problem is that "building Shenzhen" isn't a "project", and never can be a "project". The key feature of an industrial ecosystem like this is its enormous diversity -- hundreds of thousands of companies, large and small, doing complementary and competitive and most importantly different things. That is not something that can ever be matched by a monolithic "project". But it is something that absolutely requires large number of both bodies and brains. STEM graduates is, as I say, a poor proxy, but I can't think of a better one. Feel free to suggest. (Hint: it isn't GDP or anything like that, otherwise China would never have been able to do this in the first place.)
  - pathseeker 8y ago
    >The key feature of an industrial ecosystem like this is its enormous diversity A bunch of engineers all graduating from the same Chinese school system under the same censorship regime != "diversity". >and most importantly different things. Some are doing different things, but that has nothing to do with the number of STEM graduates. Your incorrect presumption here is that a STEM graduate is magically innovative and entrepreneurial, which there is no evidence of. >STEM graduates is, as I say, a poor proxy, but I can't think of a better one. So don't use it at all. If STEM graduates were enough, why do you think that China hasn't displaced Silicon Valley in the software game? >Feel free to suggest. Incentives, market conditions, and government support. In other words, stuff that can only partially be controlled. Silicon Valley is a direct product of research into military technology driven by the Cold War. No number of STEM graduates can replicate that.

by nkoren 8y ago

pathseeker 8y ago

This entire statement is predicated on STEM graduates being a proxy, but you provide no evidence that's the case. Building complex market ecosystems has very little to do with supply of STEM graduates. Having some supply is certainly a prerequisite, but there is no indication that the current supply rate is the prerequisite. I suggest you read the mythical man month, it illustrates the fallacious thinking behind throwing more bodies at projects to get them done faster.

nkoren 8y ago
I've read the Mythical Man Month, and it has no bearing on what I'm talking about here. The problem is that "building Shenzhen" isn't a "project", and never can be a "project". The key feature of an industrial ecosystem like this is its enormous diversity -- hundreds of thousands of companies, large and small, doing complementary and competitive and most importantly different things. That is not something that can ever be matched by a monolithic "project". But it is something that absolutely requires large number of both bodies and brains. STEM graduates is, as I say, a poor proxy, but I can't think of a better one. Feel free to suggest. (Hint: it isn't GDP or anything like that, otherwise China would never have been able to do this in the first place.)
- pathseeker 8y ago
  >The key feature of an industrial ecosystem like this is its enormous diversity A bunch of engineers all graduating from the same Chinese school system under the same censorship regime != "diversity". >and most importantly different things. Some are doing different things, but that has nothing to do with the number of STEM graduates. Your incorrect presumption here is that a STEM graduate is magically innovative and entrepreneurial, which there is no evidence of. >STEM graduates is, as I say, a poor proxy, but I can't think of a better one. So don't use it at all. If STEM graduates were enough, why do you think that China hasn't displaced Silicon Valley in the software game? >Feel free to suggest. Incentives, market conditions, and government support. In other words, stuff that can only partially be controlled. Silicon Valley is a direct product of research into military technology driven by the Cold War. No number of STEM graduates can replicate that.