tl;dr written by two ex-program managers from DARPA, the article argues fostering innovation in US through diffusion of R&D results through the industry, as opposed to project-based, breakthrough focused research. It refers to a highly successful historical examples of NACA and SEMATECH. I’ve been a big fan of NACA model, see Roger Launius writing about this here: https://spacenews.com/naca-model-technology-transfer ( More: https://launiusr.wordpress.com/tag/naca )
IMO, this is far less discussed and important side of industrial policy, in our renewed interest in it. Effective government funded R&D, tech transfer, intellectual property frameworks, and so on. Just leaving this to [American Dynamism](https://a16z.com/american-dynamism/) and expecting things to sort themselves out is a bit rose-colored glasses
1 Comment
tl;dr written by two ex-program managers from DARPA, the article argues fostering innovation in US through diffusion of R&D results through the industry, as opposed to project-based, breakthrough focused research. It refers to a highly successful historical examples of NACA and SEMATECH. I’ve been a big fan of NACA model, see Roger Launius writing about this here: https://spacenews.com/naca-model-technology-transfer ( More: https://launiusr.wordpress.com/tag/naca )
IMO, this is far less discussed and important side of industrial policy, in our renewed interest in it. Effective government funded R&D, tech transfer, intellectual property frameworks, and so on. Just leaving this to [American Dynamism](https://a16z.com/american-dynamism/) and expecting things to sort themselves out is a bit rose-colored glasses