I do hope EU considers setting some of the money aside to create micro-seeds for chip startups. Big grants often leads to big waste. Putting aside 5% of the $6B program to fund one hundred early startups would give incredible long term ROI. $3M should be enough to go from concept to low volume production in many instances.
It all starts with convincing young people that it doesn't make sense anymore to pick an education aimed at earning "easy money" or get a diploma in a relaxing way. We have more than enough unemployed communication advisors, lawyers, economics etc.
A technical profession is still considered difficult, low status, geeky, boring etc. People forget an economy can't sustain in the long term by just shifting "services".
I don't think there is a revenue model....
apart from tax and spend....
But to quote from the "Nanoelectronics beyond 2020" document: "The companies and institutes in Europe’s nanoelectronics ecosystem propose a strategic research and innovation program with a total investment
of 100 billion € up to the year 2020. By 2020, the programme aims to increase Europe’s
nanoelectronics-based world-wide revenues by over 200 billion € per year, and create an
additional 250,000 direct and induced jobs in Europe."
a little too late for europe, a new leading edge 300mm fab is 6 billion dollars, 450nm I dont even know how much, so three of them? I dont think so, especially when only two foundries are making money, TSMC and SMIC everybody else is losing money.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.