5 ms·

It's remarkable how much cash Big Tech has and how little they do with it. They could start massive R&D centers that do fundamental research like Bell Labs. If

It's remarkable how much cash Big Tech has and how little they do with it. They could start massive R&D centers that do fundamental research like Bell Labs. If they return cash to shareholders as stock buybacks, they'd self-indict they're no longer growing. Want innovation in USA? Big Corp needs to invest and employees need to pressure them because shareholders sure as hell wouldn't. Big Tech has little national interest, they're all global international corporations [1] – I really don't mean to start a national interst comment war, I am pointing out that they can invest if they so desire to. As of Nov, Apple has $190B, Alphabet $168B, Microsoft $137B and Amazon $86B in cash [2]. [1] This story got little coverage. $275 Billion. That's more than what Intel just announced yesterday to invest in Ohio. I consider 'The Information' best in class of SV reporting, yet not a peep from any major news source afaik: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chinese-authorities-apple-ceo-signed-275-billion-deal-with-them https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chine... [2] https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp500-companies-stockpile-1-trillion-cash-investors-want-it/ https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp500-compa...

syshum 5y ago
Well Microsoft has 68 Billion less now.... ;) but I agree with your comment, most of Silicon Valley has been Anti-American for a number of decades now. They just want to extract from America
- fault1 5y ago
  Why should they necessarily put the sole R&D center in America? They are all international companies, unlike the old AT&T.
  - syshum 5y ago
    I would not say they need to put all of them, but some of them would be useful. I do wonder if people would have the same opinion is they were putting those research dollars Russia, or North Korea, etc?
  - als0 5y ago
    Indeed. Almost all the industrial research companies have a lab outside the U.S. for maximizing talent acquisition and for other useful things like local funding and tax reasons.
- KerrAvon 5y ago
  Apple directly employs 80,000 people in the USA, and I believe pays the highest tax amount of any single US corporation. What are you even talking about?
  - syshum 5y ago
    How many of those are in Bell Labs style R&D. Also paying taxes is not being pro-america, or patriotic, or anything like that. You can have lots of employees, pay lots of taxes and still be anti-american Hell I believe the income tax is theft so highlighting how much apple pays in taxes even if your statement is true has nothing to do with what I am talking about
curious_cat_163 5y ago
I think MSR and Google Brain are counter examples, in that, they do a lot of research and put it in public domain. Apple doesn’t do much of this —- they’ve never really done it. It makes one wonder why.
- KerrAvon 5y ago
  Apple used to have a group doing basic CS research in the MSR vein in the 80’s and 90’s. IIRC, Steve killed it when he came back in ‘97 because Apple was literally running out of money and they needed to concentrate resources on resurrecting the basic product lines to have any future at all.
- Beltalowda 5y ago
  Things like lasers and the discovery Cosmic Background Radiation come from Bell Labs. And oh yeah, they also did this little operating system and a quirky successful programming language, but that's far from the only thing that was (and is) done at Bell Labs. Microsoft Research and Google Brain are much more focused on computer stuff and future product development. That's all fine, but really in a different class. I don't think we'll see them get a Nobel Prize for fundamental discoveries in physics, chemistry, biology, etc. anytime soon.
bumby 5y ago
I wonder how much of this is pragmatism. The current method of growth seems to be acquisition vs. funding in-house R&D. This makes a certain amount of sense because it means ideas have longer to be validated before committing funds to them.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  I think the centralized Bell Labs approach affords long-term research whereas startups are narrowly focused, interested in exit, strapped up and duct-taped underneath – 'like building an airplane while it is flying', inexperienced, VC-pressured, and less resourceful. Good point though, that's where Big Tech spends cash - acquisition. I was searching a bit more and Big Tech has been doing a bit of stock buybacks as well.
kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
That would cut into MBA bonuses. Open-ended research is a cost center.
throwawayboise 5y ago
Bell Telephone had a government monopoly on their primary line of business. They had the luxury of being able to spend money on pure research without worrying about the competition.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  Big Tech is essentially constantly fighting to not appear as monopolies. They for all intents and purposes, monopolies or duopolies. > In a 449-page report that was presented by the House Judiciary Committee’s Democratic leadership, lawmakers said the four companies had turned from “scrappy” start-ups into “the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons.” The lawmakers said the companies had abused their dominant positions, setting and often dictating prices and rules for commerce, search, advertising, social networking and publishing. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/technology/congress-big-tech-monopoly-power.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/technology/congress-big-t...
- mikro2nd 5y ago
  This is nonsense because, in the same era, IBM, HP and others (later Sun) ran R&D labs that published some of the most highly-regarded research journals available anywhere.

syshum 5y ago

Well Microsoft has 68 Billion less now.... ;) but I agree with your comment, most of Silicon Valley has been Anti-American for a number of decades now. They just want to extract from America

fault1 5y ago
Why should they necessarily put the sole R&D center in America? They are all international companies, unlike the old AT&T.
- syshum 5y ago
  I would not say they need to put all of them, but some of them would be useful. I do wonder if people would have the same opinion is they were putting those research dollars Russia, or North Korea, etc?
- als0 5y ago
  Indeed. Almost all the industrial research companies have a lab outside the U.S. for maximizing talent acquisition and for other useful things like local funding and tax reasons.
KerrAvon 5y ago
Apple directly employs 80,000 people in the USA, and I believe pays the highest tax amount of any single US corporation. What are you even talking about?
- syshum 5y ago
  How many of those are in Bell Labs style R&D. Also paying taxes is not being pro-america, or patriotic, or anything like that. You can have lots of employees, pay lots of taxes and still be anti-american Hell I believe the income tax is theft so highlighting how much apple pays in taxes even if your statement is true has nothing to do with what I am talking about

curious_cat_163 5y ago

I think MSR and Google Brain are counter examples, in that, they do a lot of research and put it in public domain. Apple doesn’t do much of this —- they’ve never really done it. It makes one wonder why.

KerrAvon 5y ago
Apple used to have a group doing basic CS research in the MSR vein in the 80’s and 90’s. IIRC, Steve killed it when he came back in ‘97 because Apple was literally running out of money and they needed to concentrate resources on resurrecting the basic product lines to have any future at all.
Beltalowda 5y ago
Things like lasers and the discovery Cosmic Background Radiation come from Bell Labs. And oh yeah, they also did this little operating system and a quirky successful programming language, but that's far from the only thing that was (and is) done at Bell Labs. Microsoft Research and Google Brain are much more focused on computer stuff and future product development. That's all fine, but really in a different class. I don't think we'll see them get a Nobel Prize for fundamental discoveries in physics, chemistry, biology, etc. anytime soon.

bumby 5y ago

I wonder how much of this is pragmatism. The current method of growth seems to be acquisition vs. funding in-house R&D. This makes a certain amount of sense because it means ideas have longer to be validated before committing funds to them.

systemvoltage 5y ago
I think the centralized Bell Labs approach affords long-term research whereas startups are narrowly focused, interested in exit, strapped up and duct-taped underneath – 'like building an airplane while it is flying', inexperienced, VC-pressured, and less resourceful. Good point though, that's where Big Tech spends cash - acquisition. I was searching a bit more and Big Tech has been doing a bit of stock buybacks as well.

kevin_thibedeau 5y ago

That would cut into MBA bonuses. Open-ended research is a cost center.

throwawayboise 5y ago

Bell Telephone had a government monopoly on their primary line of business. They had the luxury of being able to spend money on pure research without worrying about the competition.

systemvoltage 5y ago
Big Tech is essentially constantly fighting to not appear as monopolies. They for all intents and purposes, monopolies or duopolies. > In a 449-page report that was presented by the House Judiciary Committee’s Democratic leadership, lawmakers said the four companies had turned from “scrappy” start-ups into “the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons.” The lawmakers said the companies had abused their dominant positions, setting and often dictating prices and rules for commerce, search, advertising, social networking and publishing. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/technology/congress-big-tech-monopoly-power.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/technology/congress-big-t...
mikro2nd 5y ago
This is nonsense because, in the same era, IBM, HP and others (later Sun) ran R&D labs that published some of the most highly-regarded research journals available anywhere.