[dahart]

Your top comment was about cultures of excellence in corporate research, and the economics of product development. Now we’re having a debate about the most impactful tech and/or researcher?

Nothing on my small list of examples was done on VC cash in a few months. And my list was not exhaustive (indicated by “just to name a few”), I’m leaving it up to you to name today’s impactful tech. You don’t think any foundational technology development is happening in the world today? Why? I disagree. Let’s add quantum, smartphones, CRISPR, 3d printing and bitcoin to the list. What is your criteria or metric for declaring information theory above AI? AI is building on theories of intelligence and thought and latent information content in ways Shannon never thought of. We don’t know which of today’s papers will have the most lasting impression yet, let’s revisit this question in the year 2070. I simply pointed out that places to do good research like Shannon was doing are far more common now than when he was doing it.

[mdanger007]

I think we basically agree on the need for long-term positions and cultures to develop things like CRISPR and Quantum. What my original post refers to is that the average FAANG employee stays at the company for a little over a year these are the free agency moves that hurt technology in innovations like the ones you mentioned..

[dahart]

Don’t conflate research with the average employee. There are still career tech stars and research groups today, in fact many, many more of them than in 1950. They aren’t average employees and never were, just like Shannon was not an average employee. The average employee in 1950 also changed jobs when it suited them.

Anyway, I don’t think it’s true that the average FAANG employee leaves in 1 year. Some people do job-hop looking for more pay or faster advancement, but everyone knows hopping too fast or too often is a red flag on a resume. I work in a big well known tech company amongst hundreds of career researchers, academics, and excellent developers, and your narrative doesn’t fit them at all. I’m aware of lots of other companies with similar situations.

Probably the biggest thing that’s happened between now and Shannon’s day is that corporate research pays so well and there’s so much of it now that researchers are flocking to corporate jobs and leaving academia. That isn’t necessarily a problem in terms of innovation, it might be a good thing on the whole, but it might be a problem for the university ecosystem.