Saw this last night before I went to sleep, but still no comments. Can't be a lack of karma from the poster. I'm legitimately curious to see the response of tech crowd, but it's just crickets.

I mean, what is there to say? China has poured billions into research and education. That coupled with a culture that puts great emphasis on education, it’s not surprising. The US is much more (culturally) Laissez-faire when it comes to education. The US can promote, but if people aren't interested…well, not much you can do.

Thanks for responding. I'm less concerned with 'how' it happened than considering the consequences. If we were, say, in 20th place rather than 2nd place, would you still feel there is nothing to say on the topic?

I think it’s just a matter of proportion. Numbers. China has nearly 100 million more registered drivers that the US has total population. As resources come to parity I think it’s kind of impractical to try to out-compete a country that has nearly 4X the population on purely a numbers basis. Pick strategic areas of research that are of deemed importance and compete efficiently and with smarts.

Sure, even if the US was number 3, I would be asking, “guys, let’s get it together.” But countries like India and China are going to make their contributions known on the basis of size alone. If these countries had similar per person resource allocation as the US does, I wouldn't be surprised if they generated 3-5x the output.

Looking at scientific publications per capita shows that currently the research output of a nation is not strictly a function of population. Note that the UK and Germany both appear in the top five per capita. Further, both China and India are nowhere near the top of the list on a per capita basis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of...

I understand what you’re saying. I see the data. That’s why I clarified my statement with —- if ‘resource parity’.

I think the data, while true, doesn’t do a great job of illustrating culture, tradition, education policy, and industrial policy.

That’s just my interpretation though. Like I said, knowing what I know about India and China in conjunction with their large populations, and their potential for increased growth and resource development, I don’t feel like it’s anything you should be spilling tea over. I would be more concerned if the US had a drop in total yearly publications rather than being overtaken.

Agreed.

Just trying to stimulate a discussion on what I find an interesting topic. Curious if someone would opine about "free markets" or "democratic governance". Didn't think I'd live to see the ISS politicized - and science generally - but here we are.

Ok, fine, I'll repost what I wrote on the last time this was posted.

"Well, that's a good thing, as conceptually everyone wins with open academic literature. It is suggested that the papers are of similar quality to American works, so I presume the reproducibility crisis is also a consideration."

The article doesn't discuss "open" academic literature, which is free and open for all to read. It simply states that the volume of academic literature produced in China surpassed the US. You and I likely won't be able to access that literature for free.

Separately, I'm aware of the reproducibility issue in modern published studies and would like to learn more. Do you have a good article to share?

Deflections aside, what are the realistic implications of America not being number one in science research output? Apparently, this is a topic that most on HN are not yet ready to contemplate.

Good to see Chinese make progress in sciences, without buying off brains from the third world in the name of greencards, so-called values, etc.