Print 98 comment(s) - last by MrPoletski.. on Jan 13 at 7:12 AM

Aneesh Chopra  (Source: AFP)
CEA President Gary Shapiro says the government is silencing innovation

The Obama administration has already had a profound impact on technology.  From charging Intel with antitrust violations to taking majority ownership of GM and Chrysler, the administration's actions have profoundly affected the tech landscape.  And as new decisions, such as the proposed ACTA treaty and Copenhagen climate promises loom, the Obama administration is a hot topic at the 2010 Consumer Electronics Show.

Obama's Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra was in Las Vegas yesterday, but received a rather icy welcome from Consumer Electronics Association President Gary Shapiro, who admonished the Obama administration's approach on many topics.

He offered mild criticism of the bailout of the financial and auto sectors, which he called "panic spending".  And he stated, "When it comes to innovation, there's a lot the government can do, and there's a lot they should not do.  The government doesn't spur innovation or entrepreneurship. The government often gets in the way."

Mr. Shapiro complains that the Obama administration isn't doing enough to make sure that the U.S.'s trade policy allows our goods to compete with cheaper goods elsewhere.  He also complains that they are dragging their feet about implementing measures to allow the faster transfer of tech savvy workers from nations like China and India.

An apologetic Chopra commented, "We have to eat our own dogfood.  Gary is right about the federal deficit. We are in an economic crisis but we are going to tackle it. We have to get it right."

Mr. Chopra is a graduate of John Hopkins and worked in government and as the managing director at a health think tank before taking on the role of government CTO.  The tech industry's leadership has thus far been rather mixed in their opinions on his leadership and that of the Obama administration.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: You gotta be %^&* kidding me
By SandmanWN on 1/8/2010 7:18:46 PM , Rating: 2
Really? So why is it when it was announced the stock market rebounded, in which the bill ended up not being passed. When the bill was finally passed the stock market failed to rebound in the same way, that's not my opinion that's the financial markets opinion.

Pretty simple with anyone with a brain that has actually learned anything from what has happened.

The markets fluctuate on the possibilities of just about everything. A larger than average thunderstorm flings the market into turmoil. You aren't exactly hitting me whirlwind evidence here. Speculation is one of the biggest pitfalls of the current market and that hasn't changed under Bush or Obama.
.. and what exactly do you think was the purpose of pumping billions back into financial institutions?

And what do you mean it didn't have an instant effect? Are you blind??? Did you not see the effect of an imminent run on the bank that was circulating when these institutions were floundering? It happened to many small banks, and one particular bank in California that was ceased by Feds before it collapsed in utter disarray.

The whole and entire purpose of TARP was the stop the imminent collapse of the dollar. The was no collective insight beyond that. There wasn't enough time! Nor did they have any idea how many banks would be affected or the outcome of lending for the next year. They took the biggest banks that had the highest impact of the economy and did what was necessary for their survival, thats it! Sorry, but you are clearly looking back on the situation with so much revisionist history and hatred that you can't tell the obvious from your little fantasy world.

RE: You gotta be %^&* kidding me
By ekv on 1/11/2010 3:25:39 AM , Rating: 1
bank in California that was ceased by Feds

as in deceased? or perhaps seized? The way I heard it was that Paulson was shoving TARP down everybodies throat, so to speak, including small banks that were perfectly solvent and did NOT want the money. With the money, of course, came Federal control. Etc.

The whole and entire purpose of TARP was the stop the imminent collapse of the dollar

Odd statement, especially considering that the Fed has not supported the dollar for quite some time. Foreign governments and other large holders of dollars aren't happy at losing billions upon billions [may Carl Sagan roll over in his grave 8] of dollars in the process. Pressure is mounting to do something. FOMC meeting is Jan. 25-26 which, simply, will be interesting.

I am also terribly curious what the deal tween Turbo Timmy and AIG was. Of course, that transaction isn't exactly transparent. Or is it?

"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki