My colleague @_jackcorrigan wrote a report on this a few years ago! The figures are for Chinese STEM PhDs. cset.georgetown.edu/publicat…

The White House just paused ALL visa interviews for foreign students. A disaster for longterm US competitiveness in emerging techs. Five months in, and the damage is adding up. A detailed account of the disruptions to US science, by month. 🧵 /40

Excited to share my first report with the @AtlanticCouncil, co-authored with @PeterEngelke1! We focus on how US-China competition in AI is playing out in the Global South—and why China’s position may be stronger than many in Washington realize. 🧵 /18

Important and timely piece by @SamBresnick and @_jackcorrigan, especially given the WH focus on bringing manufacturing to the US. The piece sparked a few thoughts: In the US, innovation/tech is too often synonymous with sleek new software applications. In China, it's the opposite. Beijing prioritizes hardware, manufacturing, production of 'stuff'. Why does this matter? Because software and hardware are on completely different development timelines. Hardware often requires substantial CapEx over long periods -- patient capital. But US investors have been largely uninterested in long-term investment horizons. The VC/PE model of the 2010s prioritized fast exits and quick returns. VCs and PEs usually look for exits 3-7 years after their initial investment. While in South Korea last year, I spoke with some folks at LG. They said that they'd been investing in their battery tech for over 30 years ago. That kind of time horizon is unheard of in the US. While China has its own weaknesses, Beijing can better support patient capital in strategic sectors and technologies. For example: Government Guidance Funds, the STAR market, and good old fashion subsidies. That said, the software-first attitude in the US may be shifting. US capital seems more willing to invest in hardware, especially as it is increasingly difficult to find new SAAS unicorns. Had a conversation with one VC investor who projected that 90% of ROI in the next decade will come from hardware investments. I think US investors are shifting their attitudes, but will it be enough? Too little too late? I think this piece is highly relevant to A: we focus mostly on LLM capabilities, but equally important is how we can integrate AI systems into the physical world. It feels like the USG is behind the ball here. I worry that China is rapidly catching up in software, but our ability to compete in hardware is falling behind. And because hardware requires longer time horizons and more investment, falling behind now will keep us behind in the future. Rant over! Highly recommend reading the piece below: