All I asked for was a citation, as my observations have been that smaller companies are more willing to take risks as they need to survive.

The larger the corporation, the more risk adverse they are.

▲

bko 12 hours ago | parent [-]

You don't need a citation for everything. It's common sense.

But sure, look at big tech with a money printing machine, insane margins and revenue. Amazon spends 90b a year on r&d (~14% of revenue). Meta is about 26% of revenue and so on.

That's risk as it's not tied to their core business and most if not all is punted away.

Can you give me a citation of a small company willing to punt 14-24% of their revenue on long term projects that may not bare any results?

▲

shagmin 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

How much of Meta's r&d is spent on keeping people addicted to their apps? I'd argue Amazon and Meta were both more innovative when there was no or very little revenue.

Meta essentially replaced myspace, which basically went down hill after being bought out by a much larger company.

	▲	bko 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Why do you ask questions you can easily ask to an LLM? You probably don't care, your world view is "Meta bad". Meta created and support React which runs much of the internet. Pytorch, which runs most AI models. GraphQL, Jest, Llama (one of the first open weights models) and more that I can't remember. What are you talking about?

▲

mint5 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That world model is not in touch with reality.

R&D spend does not correlate with innovation or creativity. It’s surprising what gets counted as R&D in a big company.

Small companies have to have an innovative product in order to compete with the big fish who operate economies of scale.

	▲	bko 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Very productive comment. Here is my reply: R&D spend does correlate with innovation and creativity. It’s surprising what it takes to consider something as R&D in a big company.