8 ms·

Australia ranked 61/63 countries for entrepreneurship

33 points by contingencies 4y ago

arthurcolle 4y ago
it says 19 on the site, not 61
- trinovantes 4y ago
  19 overall but 63 in entrepreneurship category
  - arthurcolle 4y ago
    ah thank you, I didn't notice that. my apologies
dontbenebby 4y ago
It could be worse :-)
Rodeoclash 4y ago
Well, any software that gets written here can be legally forced to have secret backdoors in it by the government, so I'm not surprised people perhaps don't want to build products here.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Youden 4y ago
  This is FUD. The law has always had limitations built-in to ensure that this isn't true [0]. The government can only force you to use backdoors you already have, for example if you don't use end-to-end encryption and already have the keys. [0]: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s317zg.html http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997...
  - Enderboi 4y ago
    You can't be forced to introduce a "systemic" weakness. On the other hand, a certain four-letter agency can certainly craft a TAN requesting you to, say, weaken your key negotiation for a specific client. That's targetted, not systemic. And hey, you're not removing the encryption your just making it slightly less secure. Neatly sidesteps a whole bunch of restrictions in 317ZG. It's only FUD until the policy makers decide it's the norm :P
    - Youden 4y ago
      A "back door" would by definition be systemic, so the initial comment's statement that the government could compel backdoors is FUD. But yes, targeted attacks are permitted, but only so long as they don't cause any collateral damage. Making encryption systemically less secure is forbidden by 317ZG paragraph 3.
      - alfiedotwtf 4y ago
        Have you read the whole legislation? It's not FUD... the Australian government has the powers for full commandeering of it's citizens via TOLA
        Youden 4y ago
        I've given you a factual basis for my claim that backdoor powers are FUD: section 317ZG puts clear limitations in place that forbid backdoors or any other kind of systemic weakness. If you want to argue that backdoor powers are real and not FUD, please back up your statement with facts (e.g. a limitation on 317ZG or a case where it does not apply).
        alfiedotwtf 4y ago
        > Designated communications provider must not be requested or required to implement or build a systemic weakness or systemic vulnerability The key words here being systemic. Sure, they can't create a backdoor that will allow weaken everyone's protections, but the way the whole 317ZG is written is that between the lines a "communications provider" can be compelled to provide targeted access to individuals. For example, let's say all our phones have e2e encryption and cannot be unencrypted unless you have a password. There is scope within the act to commandeer Google/Apple (who both have offices in Australia) to push targeted updates to a specific user and save targeted plaintext data or even install a keylogger etc. In other words, this would then give authorities access to plaintext data on the phone without a user's consent, all without being systemic weakness. And I'm writing this based on many discussions with lawyers. I was very vocal about the AABill when most people Australian tech people didn't care, but I can tell you know that a lot of lawers were concerned and reached out. It is commandeering Full. Stop. Want to disobey a TAR, TAN, or TCN? Go right ahead given that you say it's not FUD... but be my guest arguing with: 9 Subsection 3LA(5) Repeal the subsection, substitute: Offences (5) A person commits an offence if: (a) the person is subject to an order under this section; and (b) the person is capable of complying with a requirement in the order; and (c) the person omits to do an act; and (d) the omission contravenes the requirement. Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years or 300 penalty units, or both.
orzig 4y ago
Australians: Do you think it’s cultural, economic, or policy?
- top_post 4y ago
  Literally all of the above.
- dragonsky67 4y ago
  I think as an Australian, it's a bit of each. There is not a great tradition amongst most Australians of trying to "Make it Big.". The Australian dream has been the house on the 1/4 acre block, not making millions in a Silicon Valley style buyout. Add to that the poor regard for those who are seen to be exploiting others for their personal gain and a strong dose of "Tall Poppy Syndrome" where the populous tries to tear down people who seem to be getting too big for their boots and you have a place where American style entrepreneurism is not encouraged. That said, we tend to celebrate those who step ahead in business, but do it in a way that supports their workers and community.
  - HappyTypist 4y ago
    How can you even buy a 1/4 acre house without making millions? Those go for $2-5 million in Sydney.
    - dragonsky67 4y ago
      You are so correct, property ownership is now just a dream, however I stand by the cultural inertia of home ownership rather than "making it big" as being an underlying driver in peoples minds. Why else would people take up mortgages at very low interest rates that will be impossible for them to make payments when the interest rates start to rise as they have started to do. My kids (low 20's) still seem to dream that owning a home (well at least having a mortgage) is something that they can aspire to on a normal wage. The one who has given up on this idea is now tending towards "not playing" as being a logical decision with regards to economic participation, and to be honest who could argue with them.
    - 4y ago
plugger 4y ago
lol, investment in communications ranked 4th. our internet speeds are garbage, what is this metric even meant to represent?
- yawnxyz 4y ago
  I was surprised by how terrible NBN is, and how expensive/rare fiber internet is in Sydney. People commonly complain how bad internet access is in the US, but at least the major cities have access to fiber...
  - bob778 4y ago
    Almost 95% of Sydney has fiber thanks to the NBN? (FTTN or better)
    - yawnxyz 4y ago
      For some reason we had trouble getting that where we live. Looking into it again
    - peblos 4y ago
      I wouldn’t describe FTTN (or FTTC) as providing fibre services to customers FTTP services are increasing but still limited
      - threeseed 4y ago
        The names literally describe what they do. They are providing fibre to the node or to the curb. For most people this is a massive reduction in the amount of faulty, old, poorly maintained copper that is being replaced: https://delimiter.com.au/2012/05/01/worst-of-the-worst-photos-of-australias-copper-network/ https://delimiter.com.au/2012/05/01/worst-of-the-worst-photo...
        oneplane 4y ago
        How the *** are those even allowed to be built like that? Since they all have the same form factor, crimps, "pits" (?????) etc. someone must have thought that those were acceptable materials to build communication infrastructure with? What? How? Why? I thought this was a bad copper node in an older part of the network: https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-7.jpg https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-7.jpg (old pre-VDSL cabinet) but it looks like a fresh high-grade install compared to those 2012 examples. Maybe we're just lucky with higher population density and not much happening between the street cabinet and the premises. DOCSIS version of the same type of cabinet with a better view: https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-3.jpg https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-3.jpg They are essentially grey metal boxes on a concrete block with feed-throughs for tubes where the lines pass through, and then there's a backboard where you usually find DIN-rails or just screw-in devices and your labelled cables either go to a termination block or straight into the distribution block. The termination block has the benefit of not needing 'wire extensions' since once they are in they will never have to come out unless corrosion happens (but the gravel mixed with some absorbing stuff should prevent most of that). Maybe I should go for some digital archaeology of public communication infrastructure gore because thinking about it some more it has to be at least as bad around here in some places.
streamlining 4y ago
Australians only know how to write grant proposals, not much else.
- yawnxyz 4y ago
  Though grants are smaller here than in the US, they're fairly numerous compared to the # of groups applying for them. We're using grants to get us farther before turning to VCs.
  - streamlining 4y ago
    Just a joke, I have far worse to say about the people of my own country.
yawnxyz 4y ago
Recently having moved to Sydney from the US to do startup stuff (working on a clinical trial here), it's definitely got a "home town" feel compared to the US. I really like the feel though — everyone in the VC world here seems to know and support each other; haven't seen that much politics and infighting yet. However, the science / grant world here is pretty crazy, as one professor put it "In Australia everyone loves to fight over nothing" — "nothing" being the smaller grant sizes here compared to other places like Europe or the US
- threeseed 4y ago
  > everyone in the VC world here seems to know and support each other; haven't seen that much politics and infighting yet You can follow them all on Twitter so it's pretty easy to see that they do know and support each other. Not that surprising when majority of VCs are based in Sydney/Melbourne and the likelihood of co-investing is high. The problem with that is you end up with a hive-mind, consensus-driven, conservative attitude towards investment. So even at the seed stage you end up needing solid traction, high quality team and some incredible metrics compared to investors in other countries. And worst of all they love nothing more than startups who copy US ideas e.g. 15 min food delivery and try to apply it here. So you do see profitable startups but often are uninspiring and insipid.
bob778 4y ago
It’s worth noting many of these metrics are measuring the quality 4-5 years ago, and I think its improving relatively quickly. That said, the quality of internet is such a silly metric. Almost all places, including rural Australia, have better than 25/15 with metro areas having fiber due to the NBN rollout. That really is not our limiting factor - our culture and generally small funding amounts is.
- xyzzy123 4y ago
  What's interesting to me is that Australian tech investment is a wasteland BUT there's a strong "take a punt" culture in resource exploration / prospecting. There are definitely people out there with money and a healthy risk appetite so it doesn't seem impossible to connect those dots. From my perspective an equal problem to lack of investment is very high property values and living costs.
  - dragonsky67 4y ago
    May be related to the high level of government support resource extraction attracts. I've a feeling that this is going to change somewhat.
andrewstuart 4y ago
what does it actually mean?
- LilBytes 4y ago
  Australia lacks entrepreneurs because there's less risk in property than any other business venture. You can throw your time and money into the property market which is guaranteed to be successful because of things like negative gearing and capital gains tax benefits. Negative gearing allows you to use expenses from owning property as a land lord against your own income to reduce your taxable income. while the asset (property, land) balloon in value. [0] Eventually you can sell the property and land for huge profits while using it as a tax avoidance strategy while the asset grows in value and even then at sale, you get massive Capital Gains Tax discounts.[1] There's so many incredible benefits to being a land lord in Australia which is helping fuel the ballooning property market, which is why this is typically the first investment priority for most people here. [0] https://rentbetter.com.au/view/tax-benefits-for-landlords/ https://rentbetter.com.au/view/tax-benefits-for-landlords/ [1] https://www.realestate.com.au/advice/how-to-avoid-capital-gains-tax-when-selling-property/ https://www.realestate.com.au/advice/how-to-avoid-capital-ga...
andrewstuart 4y ago
A short education about what matters in Australia, for those who don't live here * me * my money * my house must keep going up in value * selling mineral resources to other countries * selling energy resources to other countries * selling residential real estate to other countries * selling agricultural land and farms to other countries * other stuff Things that matter, but not much, or not at all: * environment * other people's financial position * Australian sovereignty (huh... what's that mean?) * the countries around us * Our defence Things that governments really don't think are serious at all, but they will pretend to think they are important: * Technology * Broadband * Startups * Entrepreneurship
- dubswithus 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- denkmoon 4y ago
  I feel this is a little bit facetious. We literally just had an election which, I think, reaffirmed how much climate matters to the average Australian, and how many people want economic security that doesn't involve digging shit out of the ground and putting it on a boat. I will agree though that entrepreneurship does not rate highly for most people. Most just want a 9-5 they can forget about when they go home. "Hustle" culture is slowly weaseling it's way in, but it's not entrenched yet.
  - andrewstuart 4y ago
    In Australia an election outcome is ultimately binary. You can't draw a single conclusion about why you ended up with a 0 or 1, based on the hundreds of issues that swirl around at election time. Unless you want to of course, in which case yes you can read a win or a loss as a clear message on one of the election issues.
combyn8tor 4y ago
There are various issues but as others have mentioned tall poppy syndrome is a big factor in Australia that prevents people from trying. Outside of a very small group of tech/VC people, friends/family/associates will be lining up to watch you fail. Unlike the US, failure is not a commendable outcome so there is increased social risk. This also translates to lower job prospects if you try to get back into the market after a startup failure.
softveda 4y ago
Australia doesn't have entrepreneurship because historically there has been almost risk free return from real estate investment. Also corporates here have no preference to higher degrees or MBAs, experience trumps education as a general rule. Due to small population and market you can't grow a SaaS business here. But I don't agree to “Australian companies are far less digitally advanced than their global competitors ". Compared to India where I know the ground reality and what I read for US/Japan/Germany we are well ahead here. I can buy $1m property sitting at home online completely paperless, I can pay tax online, open bank account online. Australians are digital savvy. Almost 60% of mobile users here have an Apple iPhone. Big corporate bring features in their apps to iPhones first due to the market share but also because iPhone users spends more. We love using digital services, except perhaps the pensioner cohort.
deterministic 4y ago
And yet Australia is a rich well functioning Democracy. A great place to live. I chose Australia over the US and that was the right choice. So perhaps entrepreneurship is less important than some might think?

33 points by contingencies 4y ago

arthurcolle 4y ago

it says 19 on the site, not 61

trinovantes 4y ago
19 overall but 63 in entrepreneurship category
- arthurcolle 4y ago
  ah thank you, I didn't notice that. my apologies

dontbenebby 4y ago

It could be worse :-)

Rodeoclash 4y ago

Well, any software that gets written here can be legally forced to have secret backdoors in it by the government, so I'm not surprised people perhaps don't want to build products here.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Youden 4y ago
This is FUD. The law has always had limitations built-in to ensure that this isn't true [0]. The government can only force you to use backdoors you already have, for example if you don't use end-to-end encryption and already have the keys. [0]: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s317zg.html http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997...
- Enderboi 4y ago
  You can't be forced to introduce a "systemic" weakness. On the other hand, a certain four-letter agency can certainly craft a TAN requesting you to, say, weaken your key negotiation for a specific client. That's targetted, not systemic. And hey, you're not removing the encryption your just making it slightly less secure. Neatly sidesteps a whole bunch of restrictions in 317ZG. It's only FUD until the policy makers decide it's the norm :P
  - Youden 4y ago
    A "back door" would by definition be systemic, so the initial comment's statement that the government could compel backdoors is FUD. But yes, targeted attacks are permitted, but only so long as they don't cause any collateral damage. Making encryption systemically less secure is forbidden by 317ZG paragraph 3.
    - alfiedotwtf 4y ago
      Have you read the whole legislation? It's not FUD... the Australian government has the powers for full commandeering of it's citizens via TOLA
      - Youden 4y ago
        I've given you a factual basis for my claim that backdoor powers are FUD: section 317ZG puts clear limitations in place that forbid backdoors or any other kind of systemic weakness. If you want to argue that backdoor powers are real and not FUD, please back up your statement with facts (e.g. a limitation on 317ZG or a case where it does not apply).
        alfiedotwtf 4y ago
        > Designated communications provider must not be requested or required to implement or build a systemic weakness or systemic vulnerability The key words here being systemic. Sure, they can't create a backdoor that will allow weaken everyone's protections, but the way the whole 317ZG is written is that between the lines a "communications provider" can be compelled to provide targeted access to individuals. For example, let's say all our phones have e2e encryption and cannot be unencrypted unless you have a password. There is scope within the act to commandeer Google/Apple (who both have offices in Australia) to push targeted updates to a specific user and save targeted plaintext data or even install a keylogger etc. In other words, this would then give authorities access to plaintext data on the phone without a user's consent, all without being systemic weakness. And I'm writing this based on many discussions with lawyers. I was very vocal about the AABill when most people Australian tech people didn't care, but I can tell you know that a lot of lawers were concerned and reached out. It is commandeering Full. Stop. Want to disobey a TAR, TAN, or TCN? Go right ahead given that you say it's not FUD... but be my guest arguing with: 9 Subsection 3LA(5) Repeal the subsection, substitute: Offences (5) A person commits an offence if: (a) the person is subject to an order under this section; and (b) the person is capable of complying with a requirement in the order; and (c) the person omits to do an act; and (d) the omission contravenes the requirement. Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years or 300 penalty units, or both.

orzig 4y ago

Australians: Do you think it’s cultural, economic, or policy?

top_post 4y ago
Literally all of the above.
dragonsky67 4y ago
I think as an Australian, it's a bit of each. There is not a great tradition amongst most Australians of trying to "Make it Big.". The Australian dream has been the house on the 1/4 acre block, not making millions in a Silicon Valley style buyout. Add to that the poor regard for those who are seen to be exploiting others for their personal gain and a strong dose of "Tall Poppy Syndrome" where the populous tries to tear down people who seem to be getting too big for their boots and you have a place where American style entrepreneurism is not encouraged. That said, we tend to celebrate those who step ahead in business, but do it in a way that supports their workers and community.
- HappyTypist 4y ago
  How can you even buy a 1/4 acre house without making millions? Those go for $2-5 million in Sydney.
  - dragonsky67 4y ago
    You are so correct, property ownership is now just a dream, however I stand by the cultural inertia of home ownership rather than "making it big" as being an underlying driver in peoples minds. Why else would people take up mortgages at very low interest rates that will be impossible for them to make payments when the interest rates start to rise as they have started to do. My kids (low 20's) still seem to dream that owning a home (well at least having a mortgage) is something that they can aspire to on a normal wage. The one who has given up on this idea is now tending towards "not playing" as being a logical decision with regards to economic participation, and to be honest who could argue with them.
  - 4y ago

plugger 4y ago

lol, investment in communications ranked 4th. our internet speeds are garbage, what is this metric even meant to represent?

yawnxyz 4y ago
I was surprised by how terrible NBN is, and how expensive/rare fiber internet is in Sydney. People commonly complain how bad internet access is in the US, but at least the major cities have access to fiber...
- bob778 4y ago
  Almost 95% of Sydney has fiber thanks to the NBN? (FTTN or better)
  - yawnxyz 4y ago
    For some reason we had trouble getting that where we live. Looking into it again
  - peblos 4y ago
    I wouldn’t describe FTTN (or FTTC) as providing fibre services to customers FTTP services are increasing but still limited
    - threeseed 4y ago
      The names literally describe what they do. They are providing fibre to the node or to the curb. For most people this is a massive reduction in the amount of faulty, old, poorly maintained copper that is being replaced: https://delimiter.com.au/2012/05/01/worst-of-the-worst-photos-of-australias-copper-network/ https://delimiter.com.au/2012/05/01/worst-of-the-worst-photo...
      - oneplane 4y ago
        How the *** are those even allowed to be built like that? Since they all have the same form factor, crimps, "pits" (?????) etc. someone must have thought that those were acceptable materials to build communication infrastructure with? What? How? Why? I thought this was a bad copper node in an older part of the network: https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-7.jpg https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-7.jpg (old pre-VDSL cabinet) but it looks like a fresh high-grade install compared to those 2012 examples. Maybe we're just lucky with higher population density and not much happening between the street cabinet and the premises. DOCSIS version of the same type of cabinet with a better view: https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-3.jpg https://www.madicom.nl/wp-content/uploads/950_670-3.jpg They are essentially grey metal boxes on a concrete block with feed-throughs for tubes where the lines pass through, and then there's a backboard where you usually find DIN-rails or just screw-in devices and your labelled cables either go to a termination block or straight into the distribution block. The termination block has the benefit of not needing 'wire extensions' since once they are in they will never have to come out unless corrosion happens (but the gravel mixed with some absorbing stuff should prevent most of that). Maybe I should go for some digital archaeology of public communication infrastructure gore because thinking about it some more it has to be at least as bad around here in some places.

streamlining 4y ago

Australians only know how to write grant proposals, not much else.

yawnxyz 4y ago
Though grants are smaller here than in the US, they're fairly numerous compared to the # of groups applying for them. We're using grants to get us farther before turning to VCs.
- streamlining 4y ago
  Just a joke, I have far worse to say about the people of my own country.

yawnxyz 4y ago

Recently having moved to Sydney from the US to do startup stuff (working on a clinical trial here), it's definitely got a "home town" feel compared to the US. I really like the feel though — everyone in the VC world here seems to know and support each other; haven't seen that much politics and infighting yet. However, the science / grant world here is pretty crazy, as one professor put it "In Australia everyone loves to fight over nothing" — "nothing" being the smaller grant sizes here compared to other places like Europe or the US

threeseed 4y ago
> everyone in the VC world here seems to know and support each other; haven't seen that much politics and infighting yet You can follow them all on Twitter so it's pretty easy to see that they do know and support each other. Not that surprising when majority of VCs are based in Sydney/Melbourne and the likelihood of co-investing is high. The problem with that is you end up with a hive-mind, consensus-driven, conservative attitude towards investment. So even at the seed stage you end up needing solid traction, high quality team and some incredible metrics compared to investors in other countries. And worst of all they love nothing more than startups who copy US ideas e.g. 15 min food delivery and try to apply it here. So you do see profitable startups but often are uninspiring and insipid.

bob778 4y ago

It’s worth noting many of these metrics are measuring the quality 4-5 years ago, and I think its improving relatively quickly. That said, the quality of internet is such a silly metric. Almost all places, including rural Australia, have better than 25/15 with metro areas having fiber due to the NBN rollout. That really is not our limiting factor - our culture and generally small funding amounts is.

xyzzy123 4y ago
What's interesting to me is that Australian tech investment is a wasteland BUT there's a strong "take a punt" culture in resource exploration / prospecting. There are definitely people out there with money and a healthy risk appetite so it doesn't seem impossible to connect those dots. From my perspective an equal problem to lack of investment is very high property values and living costs.
- dragonsky67 4y ago
  May be related to the high level of government support resource extraction attracts. I've a feeling that this is going to change somewhat.

andrewstuart 4y ago

what does it actually mean?

LilBytes 4y ago
Australia lacks entrepreneurs because there's less risk in property than any other business venture. You can throw your time and money into the property market which is guaranteed to be successful because of things like negative gearing and capital gains tax benefits. Negative gearing allows you to use expenses from owning property as a land lord against your own income to reduce your taxable income. while the asset (property, land) balloon in value. [0] Eventually you can sell the property and land for huge profits while using it as a tax avoidance strategy while the asset grows in value and even then at sale, you get massive Capital Gains Tax discounts.[1] There's so many incredible benefits to being a land lord in Australia which is helping fuel the ballooning property market, which is why this is typically the first investment priority for most people here. [0] https://rentbetter.com.au/view/tax-benefits-for-landlords/ https://rentbetter.com.au/view/tax-benefits-for-landlords/ [1] https://www.realestate.com.au/advice/how-to-avoid-capital-gains-tax-when-selling-property/ https://www.realestate.com.au/advice/how-to-avoid-capital-ga...

andrewstuart 4y ago

A short education about what matters in Australia, for those who don't live here * me * my money * my house must keep going up in value * selling mineral resources to other countries * selling energy resources to other countries * selling residential real estate to other countries * selling agricultural land and farms to other countries * other stuff Things that matter, but not much, or not at all: * environment * other people's financial position * Australian sovereignty (huh... what's that mean?) * the countries around us * Our defence Things that governments really don't think are serious at all, but they will pretend to think they are important: * Technology * Broadband * Startups * Entrepreneurship

dubswithus 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
denkmoon 4y ago
I feel this is a little bit facetious. We literally just had an election which, I think, reaffirmed how much climate matters to the average Australian, and how many people want economic security that doesn't involve digging shit out of the ground and putting it on a boat. I will agree though that entrepreneurship does not rate highly for most people. Most just want a 9-5 they can forget about when they go home. "Hustle" culture is slowly weaseling it's way in, but it's not entrenched yet.
- andrewstuart 4y ago
  In Australia an election outcome is ultimately binary. You can't draw a single conclusion about why you ended up with a 0 or 1, based on the hundreds of issues that swirl around at election time. Unless you want to of course, in which case yes you can read a win or a loss as a clear message on one of the election issues.

combyn8tor 4y ago

There are various issues but as others have mentioned tall poppy syndrome is a big factor in Australia that prevents people from trying. Outside of a very small group of tech/VC people, friends/family/associates will be lining up to watch you fail. Unlike the US, failure is not a commendable outcome so there is increased social risk. This also translates to lower job prospects if you try to get back into the market after a startup failure.

softveda 4y ago

Australia doesn't have entrepreneurship because historically there has been almost risk free return from real estate investment. Also corporates here have no preference to higher degrees or MBAs, experience trumps education as a general rule. Due to small population and market you can't grow a SaaS business here. But I don't agree to “Australian companies are far less digitally advanced than their global competitors ". Compared to India where I know the ground reality and what I read for US/Japan/Germany we are well ahead here. I can buy $1m property sitting at home online completely paperless, I can pay tax online, open bank account online. Australians are digital savvy. Almost 60% of mobile users here have an Apple iPhone. Big corporate bring features in their apps to iPhones first due to the market share but also because iPhone users spends more. We love using digital services, except perhaps the pensioner cohort.

deterministic 4y ago

And yet Australia is a rich well functioning Democracy. A great place to live. I chose Australia over the US and that was the right choice. So perhaps entrepreneurship is less important than some might think?