On 10/4/06, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (...)
- In fig. 1, what is the justification for dividing by population? Isn't the absolute rate of innovation more important than innovation per person?
(...)
I also think that's the most problematic assumption the article. Indeed absolute rate of innovation is the only thing that matters, for once an innovation is produced, it is replicated/copied by entities that had no involvement whatsoever in producing it. That said, though, if relative innovation is really falling that may be bad news anyway, for it is a consensus between demographers that the population boom in the 20th century is slowing down since the 80s, and we may stabilize at 8 billion by 2050. So a decline in relative innovation would have a noticeable impact in absolute innovation anyway. ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
