> The semiconductor industry has always had this quality: the difference between a pioneer and a founder is often just access to materials, capital, and time.
This applies not just to the semiconductor industry but almost every industry, especially the ones that don't exist yet.
And to this list I would add: a social and economic system that provides a fertile ground for research, experimentation, immigration and entrepreneurship.
While the US has built up such advantages over the years that they can't all be lost in a manic overnight tweet storm, it's sad and a bit scary to see the current environment, which is much more hostile to all of these things.
China, with heavy state subsidies, has also proven to be pretty effective. Interestingly, it hasn't had to embrace immigration because it has over a billion people.
Counterpoint on China - they will import special talent and help them immigrate. And of course, there are people who'll value the lifestyle of Shenzhen over San Francisco, or Shanghai over New York. One example that comes to mind is Dr. Erdal Arikan.
Most foreigners don't really want citizenship and are content being expats. The ones who do want citizenship are often from countries with weak passports, which often means weak infrastructure, poor HDIs and usually not that much of a skillset that they can bring to the table.
This story is a great example of the system taking a brilliant person, and stomping their opportunity down because they were from the wrong class. But replace class with whatever you like.
They do actually. There’s a fair bit of critique you can level at the system from a country-wide economic perspective and especially from a world-trade perspective, but they did manage to get a system in place where a central government can influence both the area and speed of innovation.
The main thing they do is stack the market to be very favourable for a given industry and then have extreme competition between the companies.
They not only encourage innovation but also cross-pollination too. So say you discovered some minor technology, they'll even help you connect with other folks who work in the space, potentially combine the innovations together to create a new final product that can actually be licensed to OEMs.
Where I find China lacking is in creativity and imagination. Yes, there are some changes in that front happening, but you'll never find OpenAI, Helion Energy or SpaceX being founded in China. Those projects won't even get the greenlight from the CCP to get started off the ground because of their high capital and startup costs.
It provided the above to a select few that thought the way they were supposed to. It also did NOT provide to a few million that didn’t think the correct way.
There's always someone somewhere who, with hindsight, did something that could be retconned into being similar to something important we've got today, von Däniken being an extreme example. Not putting down Losev's work, but accidentally stumbling on an interesting physical effect that you treat as a curiosity and engaging in targeted research to turn in into a product is a very different thing. For example the FET was envisaged multiple times in the same time frame as Losev's work, but wasn't rigorously pursued until Bardeen et al came along.
> He used these junctions to build solid-state versions of amplifiers, oscillators, and TRF and regenerative radio receivers, at frequencies up to 5 MHz, 25 years before the transistor. He even built a superheterodyne receiver.
That one calls them "negative resistance diodes" but I don't see how you can make a functional solid state amplifier and the like without it being a transistor.
The USSR famously invented everything the west did but years or even decades earlier, only for some reason never commercialised any of it, to the point where it became a bit of a running joke like the Su-24 "validating" the design of the F-111 which preceded it by some years. So I'd take any claims like this with a bit of a grain of salt.
Yeah, that pattern can be seen everywhere in semiconductors. E.g. the transistor invention vs. Lilienfeld, Heil, Matare etc. So the scope is more narrow than "Inventend Semiconductors".
Generally, there seems to be a tendency to disregard discoveries from outside the US. I think this pattern can still be observed today...
Other examples: Invention of light bulb, telephone.
His death at the Siege of Leningrad sounds a lot like Archimedes death at the hands of a centurion during the fall of Syracuse to the Romans. That death was told by the always reliable Livy.
I think there's likely many things even today, hidden papers, that discovered things, that no one has really decided to give it a shot and try, or figured out what can be done with it.
Thus is the crime of the communist Russia: forcing millions into hard labor to die for progress yet squandering innovation for ideological reasons. But the same mechanism is there in, say, Microsoft. To get the attention of leadership, your idea must have 9 zeros at the very least. If it doesn’t, you either leave M$ or stay there and abandon your idea. But a 7-zero idea is a pretty expensive one to be abandoned.
> "He was 38. Shortly before his death, he had mailed a manuscript describing a new three-electrode semiconductor device to Physical Review. The paper was lost in the wartime Atlantic. Five years later, Shockley, ..."
I wish the article had a reference for that claim.
I remember from my childhood that my father told me that in the old soviet system, publications from were invented and dated back in order to demonstrate the superiority of their science. Both sides might have done it.
Now, a story from my father is not strong data point. But falsification of scientific theories, statistics and publications was a thing in the Soviet Union [1,2].
We will never know the whole truth as that specific culture typically bend the facts and there are little to no proofs of the claims. During soviet era the narrative was that Russian scientists (soviet elites always preferred Russia over other republics) are behind most of human scientific advantages and others simply steal from them.
This applies not just to the semiconductor industry but almost every industry, especially the ones that don't exist yet.
And to this list I would add: a social and economic system that provides a fertile ground for research, experimentation, immigration and entrepreneurship.
While the US has built up such advantages over the years that they can't all be lost in a manic overnight tweet storm, it's sad and a bit scary to see the current environment, which is much more hostile to all of these things.