[parkan]

This article appears highly questionable (as Reason fodder often is). The list of "20th-century inventions that were never patented" is completely wrong, cellophane is USPTO #1266766, Bakelite is #1233298, zippers are contested because of terminology and structure differences but there's at least two candidates, and the others are probably covered by dozens if not hundreds separate patents. Not that I think the modern intellectual property system is functional or sane, of course.

The structure and basic mechanism of action of penicillin was determined in 1945, not that much later than its 1928(ish) discovery and certainly not "the time bacteria learned to defeat it".

I don't even know what to make of the comment that machines in early industrial england "would not have surprised Archimedes".

The sole source to support the claim about nonexistent connections between science spending and innovation appears to be an OECD study, which I would very much like to see.

Hero of Alexandria worked (as the name suggests) in a hub of technological development, published extensively, and was cited by many influential arabic texts.

Dude, come on.

[parkan]

These are just a few statements I picked at random, without even taking the bait of spurious, unsupported "rah rah free markets would have made it better!" fluff sprinkled throughout. I don't know how you can celebrate innovation and be so thoroughly wrong on so many facts in a single article.