Are there other examples of startups tackling problems that were only addressed by departments of larger problems and those startups then using their focus as an advantage?
I like the way you think. How could someone determine if this occurred? Rocket sabotage seems like a rather perfect crime, very little evidence is left afterwards.
The scaling on the simulation of the nanowire was dismal. Having effective quantum simulation would make such a tremendous impact on semiconductor development.
Your turning point of 2005 might simply be because programmers stopped developing applications that require faster serial processing. Those programmers might have stopped developing such applications because they noticed that chip clock speeds haven't increased since 2004.
Some portion of what is deemed important arises from the interaction between mathematics and physics. It would be fascinating to automate the invention of new mathematical structures and then have a post-human physicist try to apply these new structures.
"I am a hundred percent sure every kid can study MIT classes at every age." Every kid can {Watch a lecture: sure, Study: perhaps, understand: Nope}. Humans have varying levels of intelligence and Ahaan is far more intelligent than most. Disregarding his capacities does both a disservice to him and to everyone else.
The problem is mostly that parents and teachers have expectations for students beyond what most of them are intellectually capable of. There is also an excessive emphasis on empty credentialism. Both problems could be tempered via a recognition that people are not blank slates, some people like Ahaan are simply smarter than others, and the average high schooler should not be compared against him.
He seems to have tremendous breadth of curiosity, it will be interesting to see what he ultimately ends up specializing in. MIT is a big place, and trying to "major in everything" will almost certainly not turn out well.
Well put, I would further add that much of the equity in these few firms is owned by massive firms such as Blackstone, and and Blackrock. Concentrating the ownership into the hands of fewer owners further promotes anticompetitive action.
Workers tend to consume as much or more than they make in income, hence most workers would immediately liquidate their equity holdings in exchange for cash that actually improves their quality of life. The best move would be eliminating the inefficiencies in the private sector (i.e. Unions) and adding universal supplemental income via the public sector.
Africa was not blessed with the greatest geography for capital formation. The most interesting question is why Africa did not develop prior to the period of colonization, in the time period from say 1000-1500 CE when Europe when from a position of relatively inferior capital, to relatively superior capital: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(P....
At this stage in human development capital generation is pretty much completely agricultural, and thus the productivity of the land is the chief determinant of societal outcomes.