I just read this WSJ article on why Europe's tech scene is so much smaller than the US's and China's.
I'm afraid that, like most articles on this topic, it largely misses the mark.
Which in itself illustrates a key reason why Europe is lagging behind: when you fail to understand the root causes of an issue, you have zero chance to solve it.
What makes me competent to speak on this topic?
Back in the late 2000s and early 2010s, I founded and led HouseTrip which at the time was one of Europe's top startups. We were the first historical startup in which all top 3 VC investors in Europe invested.
So I have a pretty intimate knowledge of the European entrepreneurship ecosystem and what it takes to create and grow a tech company in Europe.
We were pretty promising as a startup. In fact as promising as it can possibly get.
We had a similar concept to Airbnb (with some notable differences I won't bore you with), except we created the company 1 year before they did. Which means we were the first-mover - globally - with a multi-billion-euro concept, strong financial backing by the 3 top investors in Europe and, at some point, a team of 250 people with some of the brightest minds in tech in Europe. Everything we needed to succeed.
And yet we didn't succeed: ultimately we were essentially crushed by our American competitor Airbnb in our home turf - Europe - and we had no choice but to sell ourselves to another American company, Tripadvisor.
Believe me, I've reflected long and hard on how that could have happened. In fact after I left the company in 2015 I even spent 3 months in isolation in the Annapurna mountains in Nepal to reflect full time on exactly that 😅
And I then moved to China, where I spent the next 8 years and where I had the chance to study their ecosystem to understand why they're successful and Europe isn't.
So all in all, I think I have some degree of legitimacy to comment on this topic.
The WSJ article says that Europe lags behind due to the usual suspects, the reasons you constantly hear about: too much regulation, fragmented European markets, limited access to financing, a culture that isn't conducive to the startup grind, etc.
Some of those are true, but imho all are secondary.
Take excessive regulations for instance, which gets mentioned all the time. If they were such a hindrance to startups, why would American startups succeed in Europe - like Airbnb in our case - and European startups not? We all face the same regulations 🤷
Or take fragmented markets. Same question: how could US startups successfully conquer these fragmented EU markets when European startups can't?
Because that's the real elephant in the room, and really the story of the European tech scene since the advent of the internet: US startups have shown a remarkable ability to capture European markets despite the supposed barriers, making many of the "usual suspects" explanations for Europe's tech struggles very unconvincing.
In other words, logically, any explanation where both US and European startups face identical barriers fails to address the fundamental difference in outcomes we consistently observe.
Based on my experience, the key problem faced by European startups can be summarized in one word: patriotism.
There is virtually none in Europe, and more than anything that's what's killing EU startups, or preventing them from developing.
It used to drive me absolutely nuts at HouseTrip. What a startup needs first and foremost, especially a consumer-facing startup like we were, is marketing, to become famous.
At first, when I created the company and before Airbnb was even a thing, I used to pitch the company to the media and the general response I would get was almost one of contempt, as in "why would I belittle myself to write about your startup? And furthermore, who would be stupid enough to stay in an apartment when there are hotels? You guys have no future..."
And then Airbnb got launched and the American media started their thing, hyping the company like it was the greatest innovation since sliced bread, like they were national heroes, giving them hundreds of millions in free publicity.
That's when European media started to take notice. Not of us, god forbid, but of Airbnb. The concept was promoted by Silicon Valley, see... so now it was valid.
So I went back to pitch HouseTrip to European media. This time around I was met with a different kind of contempt: "So you guys are like Airbnb? Why would we cover a European copycat when we can just write about the real American original?" Luckily I'm not violent but lets say those moments really tested my civility 😅
All in all, we arrived in the absolutely grotesque situation where, despite Airbnb not having yet set foot in Europe, they were already a cultural phenomenon there, promoted by European media, for free, when the European original - yours truly - had to spend millions on paid marketing (mostly to Google and Facebook, American companies) to achieve a small fraction of the brand recognition.
Which means that, insanely, Airbnb was probably doing more business in Europe than we did before even opening an office there, simply on the back of the free publicity they were getting. How on earth can you even compete with that?
This dynamic was at play with general European elites too. I remember very clearly having dinner next to a legendary European entrepreneur and investor - who I won't name, a man who supposedly, on paper, is dedicating his life to furthering the European tech ecosystem. We naturally got to talk about HouseTrip and he literally told me, and this is an exact quote: "you know I don't really like copycats, they really hurt the European ecosystem." Another big test for my civility that night...
And even if we had been a copycat, so what? That's how China got started, there's nothing to be ashamed of. You need to learn to walk before you can run.
In fact if you study the history of innovation you'll find that every major tech power, including the US, started by imitating and adapting others' innovations before developing their own.
Speaking of China, again a country that I know in depth for having lived there for 8 years after HouseTrip, I've come to the conclusion that patriotism, a deeply rooted mindset of sovereignty, is truly the magic ingredient behind their success.
Contrary to popular belief, they don't do it in a stupid way by just banning competition. Those cases are actually very rare and only occur if the companies in question violate Chinese law in pretty egregious ways.
Most of the time it's the exact contrary: they welcome foreign companies and competition, but create conditions where local alternatives can thrive alongside them, giving Chinese users and businesses legitimate options to choose domestic champions.
Which means you end up with, for instance, Apple doing well in China but simultaneously allowing the rise of Huawei or Xiaomi. Or Tesla doing well in China but simultaneously allowing the rise of BYD or Nio. Etc.
And China is, interestingly, more comparable to the EU than most people realize. It is, again contrary to popular belief, extremely decentralized when it comes to doing business, with various provinces competing against each other much the same way EU countries compete against each other.
But they do it in such a way where, again, the overarching sense of Chinese sovereignty never gets sacrificed at the altar of provincial competition. And where the ultimate goal is to develop Chinese champions which can successfully compete on the global stage.
So there you have it, the dirty little secret behind Europe's lag. We're essentially witnessing a "colonization of the minds" whereby Europe has structurally internalized its technological inferiority, celebrating American startups while dismissing its own homegrown companies.
Why does this barely ever get talked about? Think about it: do you seriously think that the Wall Street Journal would start advocating for, essentially, policies hostile to American tech dominance?
Much better to focus on the usual red herrings like too much regulation or fragmentation which, conveniently, would primarily result in clearing obstacles for American tech giants to dominate European markets even further, rather than nurturing homegrown competitors. This article is, in itself, an illustration of the "colonization of the minds".
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is a genuinely incredible story: China found in U.S. archives an energy source that could power its entire future for 20,000 years - and they just made it work.
I'm not exaggerating. In the 1960s the U.S. - specifically Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee - invented a revolutionary type of nuclear reactor that could run on thorium instead of uranium (much more abundant and cheaper), with no meltdown risk, generating 50x less waste, and requiring no water. Then, due to messy politics, they killed the program in 1969 and fired the visionary behind it.
Afterwards the declassified blueprints for the project sat forgotten in archives for decades. That is until Chinese scientists found them and decided in 2011 to run an experimental project in the Gansu desert to see if they could make it work.
A few days ago, after 14 years of work, they finally did.
I spent many days researching this and wrote the full story - how the technology works, the bureaucratic politics that killed it in America, and why this could genuinely be game-changing.
300 million tourists a year, free to roam everywhere unimpeded in Xinjiang, and still not a single photo evidence of this so-called "Uyghur genocide" 🤔
On the contrary you do get an overwhelming amount of photo evidence of Uyghurs just living normal lives.
Compare and contrast this with Gaza: zero tourist (or journalist, or anyone) allowed in and you still get overwhelming photo evidence.
Because, guess what, in the age of social when people are actually being mistreated and mass murdered, you can't hide it.
You can't hide it in a place that's completely blockaded, you can hide it even less in a place that's fully open to anyone (many foreigners, like almost all European countries, don't even need a visa nowadays to enter China and Xinjiang).
The BBC - which previously pushed the Xinjiang narrative hard - is trying hard to square this circle by claiming "there's a side of Xinjiang" that these 300 million tourists "don't see."
And what is that "side they don't see" according to the article? That even though the Uyghurs are there and Uyghur culture is everywhere, that's apparently not "the real Uyghur culture" because, as they claim, old towns were rebuilt for tourism and tourists see made-for-tourism ethnic performances.
Except this is literally how tourism development works everywhere in China (and pretty much everywhere in the world, frankly). Heck, this is how development - period - works: no-one wants to see the "real" old town from 1970s China because, guess what, it was completely run down and poor AF.
I partially grew up myself in a street of Paris called "rue Mouffetard" in the extremely touristic 5th arrondissement. The name of the street comes from the old French verb "mouffeter", which means to stink: this street used to be famous for smelling like shit because it was a very poor area of Paris back in the old days. Should it have been left as such so that people get to experience the "real" Paris instead of the heavily gentrified "Emily in Paris" version you get today? Anyone with a brain can see how idiotic that is.
Anyhow that's the new - utterly ridiculous - narrative: "the visible Uyghur culture doesn't count because things got redeveloped and updated."
Well, at least the Western media narrative seems to have been downgraded from crimes against humanity to "we don't like their tourism development model" - progress, I guess...
I suspect David is right here 👇 And if so it'd be the most ironic possible resolution for the Nexperia debacle.
What the White House factsheet (whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/20…) says about Nexperia is: "China will take appropriate measures to ensure the resumption of trade from Nexperia’s facilities in China, allowing production of critical legacy chips to flow to the rest of the world."
Not a word about the Netherlands or Europe, it says trade will resume FROM CHINA.
So it's entirely possible, even likely, that the deal is that Nexperia China, which effectively split from Nexperia Netherlands after the Dutch seized the company, will become the main contracting party.
Meaning the deal would effectively hand China full operational control of Nexperia's operations while leaving Europe with a hollowed-out shell company.
The theory makes sense: Nexperia China already handled 70% of the actual production for Nexperia overall. The main thing they were getting from Europe were the silicon wafers, which Europe has now stopped sending (reuters.com/world/europe/n…). But those are legacy chips products that Chinese foundries like SMIC and Hua Hong can also produce at scale so the European fabs weren't providing anything irreplaceable.
If this all gets verified, there are so many layers of irony here.
This whole debacle occurred because of the new "BIS 50% rule" introduced by the U.S. in late September that expanded US sanctions to any company that was at least 50% owned by entities on Washington's trade blacklist. Wingtech Technology, the Chinese owner of Nexperia, was added on the blacklist since last December and so Nexperia was going to get sanctioned by the U.S. too. Unless, that is, as the U.S. told the Dutch (ft.com/content/db0198…), they were to seize the company away from its Chinese owners, which is what prompted the Dutch to do exactly that simultaneously to the U.S. introducing the new "BIS 50% rule."
Since then, as part of the deal between Xi and Trump, the U.S. has agreed to suspend this "BIS 50% rule," thereby removing the whole rational the Dutch had to seize the company.
However, probably out of misplaced pride, or rather shame of looking like complete U.S. vassals, the Dutch are ridiculously claiming their seizing the company was unrelated with the "BIS 50% rule" but rather had to do with "mismanagement" by the Chinese CEO of the business who, according to them, was seeking to move Nexperia's manufacturing operations to China and transfer technological knowledge to its Chinese parent company.
Which is laughable: since when does a government seize an entire company because it wants to produce in China, all the more a company that was already producing 70% of its output in China and had Chinese ownership for years? Apparently the Dutch suddenly discovered in September 2025 - coincidentally within 24 hours after the U.S. introduced its "BIS 50% rule" - that a manufacturing footprint established years earlier now posed an urgent national security threat.
If this resolution gets confirmed it's ironies upon ironies:
- Washington created the BIS 50% rule to decouple Chinese firms from Western supply chains. In practice, it may have just decoupled from the Dutch middleman while leaving China with more control
- The Dutch justified their action by claiming it was done to prevent Nexperia moving operations to China and the result of their action seems to have caused this exact outcome
- Trump suspended the BIS 50% rule after having pressured the Dutch to act on it, leaving them holding the bag for a decision made to satisfy American strategic interests that America itself has now walked back
- Europe positioned itself as defending its technological sovereignty and it looks like they'll end up losing both the company and its credibility as a sovereign actor, all the more since the resolution was negotiated between Trump and Xi in South Korea with Europe completely absent from the table
Boom: this just got essentially confirmed by Nexperia China in a statement
This is a fascinating technical analysis that I translate from Chinese, and I give my take at the end (source 👇 x.com/FrankyChen19/s…):
"Here's something that might surprise many: Wingtech's Shanghai fab (Dingtai Jiangxin), which can replace the production capacity of Nexperia's Hamburg facility, came online just before this crisis occurred!
One important clarification upfront: Dingtai Jiangxin isn't owned by Wingtech Technology itself, but by Wingtech's controlling shareholder (the "Wentianxia Group"). This makes it a related party under common control. The reality is that Chinese fabs including SMIC and Hua Hong were already capable of replacing a substantial portion of Hamburg's capacity.
For Wingtech's own facilities to fully replace Hamburg will require a "short-term partial transition + long-term complete substitution" process—relying primarily on domestic wafer manufacturing (especially the Shanghai Dingtai Jiangxin facility). This needs time to optimize technical compatibility, scale up production, and mature automotive certifications. However, the capability to fully replace Hamburg's capacity is already planned out.
Core Replacement Capability
China's domestic wafer manufacturing ecosystem is now in place. Through a combination of proprietary facilities and partnerships, Wingtech has built manufacturing capacity covering mature process nodes and automotive-grade applications that directly matches Hamburg's core products:
1. The Centerpiece: Dingtai Jiangxin Shanghai Fab
This is the key replacement for Hamburg. Built by Wingtech's controlling shareholder, it exclusively serves Wingtech/Nexperia's semiconductor business needs, with technology and capacity planning closely aligned with Hamburg's core products:
1.1 Technology match: Hamburg focuses on 8-inch/12-inch power devices (MOSFETs, IGBTs) using mature 130-180nm processes. Dingtai Jiangxin covers 110-180nm nodes, enabling direct migration of similar products. It produces key components including Trench MOSFETs, Super Junction devices, and IGBTs, with voltage coverage spanning 12V to 1700V across low, medium, and high voltage ranges. Product overlap with Hamburg exceeds 70%.
1.2 Rapid capacity ramp: Phase 1 capacity is planned at 45,000 wafers/month, with 30,000 wafers/month already achieved in H2 2025 and full capacity expected by year-end. After Phases 2 and 3, final capacity will reach 100,000 wafers/month. At full production, this can cover 45% of Hamburg's global capacity (Hamburg's annual capacity equals roughly 1.3 million 8-inch wafers; Dingtai Jiangxin's full capacity of 1.2 million 12-inch wafers per year offers superior equivalent capacity after conversion).
1.3 Automotive certification breakthrough: Dingtai Jiangxin is built to top international automotive standards. Its next-generation MOSFET products have already entered supply chains of leading Chinese EV manufacturers, and Wingtech's automotive-grade SiC MOSFETs and GaN FETs have passed certifications from Tesla, BYD, and other major customers—providing continuity with Hamburg's automotive qualifications.
2. Supply Chain Coordination: Domestic Fab Network
Beyond its own facilities, Wingtech has established long-term partnerships with Chinese foundries including SMIC and Hua Hong. By end of 2025, domestic wafer procurement can increase to 65%, absorbing orders for general-purpose power devices from Hamburg's mature 8-inch processes and alleviating short-term capacity gaps. Meanwhile, Nexperia's Dongguan facility has achieved 90% domestic production capacity, with core technologies transferred to China, providing the process integration foundation for "domestic wafer manufacturing + assembly/testing integration.
3. Technology Reserve: Next-Generation Semiconductors
While Hamburg focuses mainly on silicon-based power devices, Wingtech has proactively deployed GaN, SiC, and other third-generation semiconductor technologies, creating dual support of "mature process replacement + advanced technology upgrade": In 2024, Nexperia China commissioned production lines for high-voltage GaN transistors and SiC diodes. In 2025, the 8-inch SiC MOSFET production line began operations. The performance of its automotive-grade 1200V SiC MOSFETs exceeds comparable market products, enabling "generational replacement" of Hamburg's silicon-based products in high-end applications like EVs and industrial power supplies."
My take: this all goes to show the extent to which the Chinese were fully prepared for the Dutch's move. Wingtech had built a parallel supply chain ready to takeover: Dingtai Jiangxin (the Shanghai fab) came online just before the seizure with capacity to replace the European operations, automotive certifications were secured from major customers (like Tesla and BYD) and SMIC and Hua Hong partnerships positioned to absorb 65% of wafer procurement.
Meaning that when the Dutch seized Nexperia thinking they were protecting a critical European asset, they actually triggered the activation of a pre-positioned Chinese replacement system that makes the European operations obsolete.
In polite terms, he effectively says that the chips export controls on China were one of the most self-destructive decisions ever taken by the US government: x.com/Yuchenj_UW/sta…
He says it caused Nvidia to go "from 95% market share to 0%" in China, and that he "cannot imagine any policymaker thinking that’s a good idea. That whatever policy we implemented caused America to lose one of the largest markets in the world to 0%.”
In a separate interview (linked below) he effectively says that might have lost the US the AI race. Because, as he puts it, "winning" the AI race means that "80% of the world uses the American tech stack" and that, given that China on its own is "50% of AI research" and "30% of the technology market", then them not using the American tech stack means that by definition America is "forfeiting and conceding" the AI race.
In that separate interview he also completely ridicules the narrative - used by the US to justify the export controls - that they were to prevent "dual use" of advanced Western chips for military purposes by China, saying that "no government, surely the Chinese government, is going to be building their defense on Western technology nor does the Pentagon use Chinese chips to build our national security."
So to sum up: in a foolish attempt to slow China's AI development, not only did the US lose its largest market, they may have lost the AI race itself.
The Nobel "Peace" Prize, being its usual mockery of itself. Basically a reward for the most rabid defendents of a western liberal order, "peace" being a distant afterthought. x.com/NobelPrize/sta…
The ideological aspect is crystal clear, see 👇 "Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace"
By which they mean liberal democracy, of course. And it couldn't be more false: the countries that have waged the most wars, by far, over the past few decades were liberal democracies (the US first and foremost).
Ok, I looked into this because sometimes claims that "China invents Y" can be somewhat exaggerated. But this is real, and completely insane.
This technology called "Bone 02" (inspired by the well-known "502 glue" in China) has been developed for the past 9 years by a team of orthopedic surgeons in Zhejiang province. The team leads are Professor Fan Shunwu (范顺武, Director of the Orthopedics Department at Zhejiang University) and Lin Xianfeng (researchgate.net/profile/Xianfe…).
It's inspired by oysters because the researchers noticed their extraordinary ability to firmly attach themselves in harsh underwater environment by secreting a special adhesive known as bio-cement, which creates a strong chemical interaction with surfaces and hardens quickly.
The properties of the glue are almost miraculous (sources: news.cn/20250910/1df93… and news.ifeng.com/c/8mVMq4PBdmJ):
- Nearly instant adhesion in blood-soaked wet physiological environments (it just takes 2-3 minutes)
- Extremely strong adhesive properties (bonding tensile force of over 400 pounds - over 181 kg)
- Complete biodegradability that naturally absorbs after about 6 months as the bone heals (no need for secondary surgery previously required in conventional treatments)
- Vast reduction of infection risks related to the traditional metal plates and screws normally needed for bone surgery
- Minimally invasive and rapid surgery since you just need a small opening large enough to apply the glue (as opposed to a complex surgery attaching metal fixations)
This glue could be especially useful for fractures with small bone fragments which are very difficult to fix with metal plates and screws.
The glue has already undergone a proper "prospective, multicenter, blinded, randomized, parallel-controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial" with over 150 patients (c.m.163.com/news/a/K95S9C0…). They've announced positive results - the glue "achieved seamless bonding of all fracture fragments" - and will soon publish the peer-reviewed paper in an orthopedics journal detailing full trial data.
They've launched a company for the product called 源囊生物 (Yuannang Bio) which just raised 2 weeks ago RMB100 million in Series A financing (bydrug.pharmcube.com/news/detail/ef…).
They could also do:
- "Yes, China's bone glue works, but at what cost?" (a classic)
- "China's bone glue is part of its biological warfare on the West"
- "Congress demands investigation into 'Dual-Use' nature of Chinese oyster technology"
- "Did China just weaponize oysters?"
- "Oysters are a Western mollusk: experts say China's bone glue violates the Convention on the Law of the Sea"
- "Oysters evolved in Europe 60 million years ago -here's how China stole their essence"
Pretty good too 👇😅
Or simply "China's bone glue: a sign of looming war with Taiwan" 😅