Since it's obvious that Dyson's statement is <i>way</i> too optimistic, I assume that for her it is (was) a good marketing - you bet a lot by investing in Russian startups, why not bet a little bit more to show to your future partners how confident you are?<p>Here is why the statement is <i>way</i> too optimistic:<p>- Resources <i>always</i> move to places where they can be used most effectively (econ 101) unless there is a significant friction<p>- For that type of resource (talented programmers/mathematicians) the friction is very small<p>- Russia has bad regulation and bad business environment in general<p>- Specifically, very hard to get investments[1], and investors interests are poorly protected[2]<p>- Silicon Valley utilizes these resource much more effectively, so that even other places in the US - NYC/Boston/Chicago - could not compete effectively<p>- Also, managerial talent in Russia is concentrated on more profitable business, like participating in natural resource explorations or working for state-run monopolies - very profitable and risk free if you have the right connections<p>Disclaimer: I'm Russian living in Silicon Valley. That may have affected my judgement.<p>[1] I can share the following anecdote: When I was helping some friends to find VC funding in 2008 in Russia, I learnt that most VCs in Russia require <i>kick-backs</i>(!) from startups that they're investing in - presumably as a way to steal from their limited partners (and even provide some advice on how these kick-backs could be recorded in accounting books).<p>[2] Khodorkovsky's and Chichvarkin's examples are probably the most well-known on the West.