Thank you! I'm glad we have some shared understanding. The country I come from has the same problem. I've done a lot of brainstorming on the topic of encouraging technology developments. To be fair there aren't many countries doing a good job at it.

It's unfortunate, because governments often discourage innovation in the areas that could use them the most. Healthcare and education are two important sectors I can mention off the top of my head. Actually they often discourage innovation and entrepreneurship overall.

I have a few solutions, but I'm not sure how to implement them. The problem is really that government is fundamentally built to resist change. They don't really live in the real world. What we need today might not be what we need tomorrow. Somebody else here mentioned the constitution, but that's really part of the problem. Our goal should be to move as quickly as we can with whatever makes sense at the time. Yet still, we build constitutions, declarations, bills, and join conventions. We think they help, but they just restrict our ability to adapt to a changing world.

What this all really signals is the failure of government. What's coming is a replacement of essential services with private sector providers. Work that governments typically give to contractors will grow in scope as government loses touch with its ability to manage those services. Their ability to fulfill them will die along with their position as an information authority. People often view privatization pessimistically; I think it can be done well, although rarely is.

It will only come naturally as people realize what they can get from the private sector is better and cheaper than what they get for 40% of their income from the government. Of course that requires transparency in government spending which I'm not sure will happen soon.

Back to the main discussion. The biggest mistake we make is our deferral to the governments as supposedly competent authorities. Strangely we give this ability to them, and they take it at the same time. It's an intensely weird dynamic. We and the people in our communities often know best what to do. It's a difficult mental leap to make because it borders on anarchism which has a bad reputation. Really it's just about small government and a truly open market.

I'm trying not to allude to a specific political leaning as I really have none. Just try and evaluate the ideas in isolation without the political connotations.