Airbus to migrate critical apps to a sovereign Euro cloud
Posted by saubeidl 16 hours ago
Comments
Comment by breve 15 hours ago
The US means to undermine the EU: https://www.dw.com/en/will-trump-pull-italy-austria-poland-h...
The US means to annex European territory: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0j9l08902eo
It's the same reason you don't want Chinese equipment in your telecommunications infrastructure. You can't trust what the Chinese government will do to it or with it.
Comment by Jon_Lowtek 5 hours ago
Comment by forgotTheLast 2 hours ago
Comment by sschueller 9 hours ago
Hopefully now "Europe" will think before fire selling all of its hardware manufacturing companies to foreign firms.
Comment by PedroBatista 9 hours ago
Comment by awestroke 6 hours ago
Comment by petcat 12 hours ago
Doesn't Europe actually have a lot of Chinese equipment in their telecom infrastructure? Is this an effort just to try not to make that mistake again?
Comment by Angostura 10 hours ago
Comment by bigyabai 7 hours ago
Comment by ulfw 11 hours ago
Comment by pigggg 8 hours ago
I remember years ago talking to some EU telecom VP who was on the engineering side that said "id buy from North Korea if the price was right".
We live in new times anyways - most of the carriers have outsourced a lot of the tech stuff to the vendors anyways.
Comment by freefrog1234aa 2 hours ago
Comment by fidotron 8 hours ago
Comment by VWWHFSfQ 12 hours ago
Comment by ben_w 9 hours ago
Being risk-averse unfortunately now means "avoid the USA".
Comment by tgsovlerkhgsel 12 hours ago
Comment by cpursley 11 hours ago
Comment by victorbjorklund 6 hours ago
Comment by Aiisnotabubble 9 hours ago
Comment by DiogenesKynikos 9 hours ago
It was actually the US that was pressuring Europe to get rid of Chinese telecom equipment, as part of the first Trump administration's broader strategy against China.
Comment by Sharlin 7 hours ago
Comment by pphysch 7 hours ago
Comment by neoromantique 7 hours ago
Comment by quotz 7 hours ago
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/06/us-ukraine-rus...
Comment by neoromantique 7 hours ago
Architect of the Ukraine crisis is Russian armed forces crossing the border and occupying the land, everything else is irrelevant.
Comment by locknitpicker 7 hours ago
Russia's hostility towards Ukraine starts well before the 2022 invasion.
Comment by neoromantique 7 hours ago
Comment by stinkbeetle 2 hours ago
Comment by quotz 5 hours ago
Comment by neoromantique 3 hours ago
Comment by i_am_a_peasant 9 hours ago
Comment by MangoToupe 12 hours ago
It's not clear that europe even trusts europe anymore. Especially with french and german economic dominance looking shakier than ever, debt financing an unpopular war in the east piling up, mounting deficits, industry collapse, youth unemployment... european countries (or greenland for that matter) could do a whole lot worse than turning to china.
Agreed, though, that reliance on US is foolhardy. I can't make any sense of why we're trying to saw the feet off our own economy.
Comment by reeredfdfdf 4 hours ago
At least with China there's some consistency. I can reliably trust them not to give a shit about me or my privacy, and to further their geopolitical interests. Meanwhile populists in the West aren't really even acting rationally from geopolitical perspective, they're more unpredictable.
Comment by nickff 3 hours ago
Comment by pembrook 12 hours ago
The US is not anti-Europe. The US has just begun to start evaluating its relationship with Europe rationally and wants it to grow up beyond the post-WW2 training wheels.
The overreaction to this kind of gives vibes of slamming the door and screaming “you don’t love me!” because dad won’t buy a new toy.
Comment by Derbasti 12 hours ago
It never existed to begin with with China, so no change is necessary.
That's not "melodramatic".
Comment by Workaccount2 8 hours ago
The US now wants to push Europe out of the nest, but most Europeans have only ever known life "living in their parents house".
Building an independent Europe is not compatible with the current European ethos of work/life/life/life balance, and will likely result in Europe either coming back to the US, falling into economic chaos, or moving into daddy Xi's house. They are a socialist country after all...
Comment by nothrabannosir 4 hours ago
> There never was a relationship of mutual trust
Technically, you're not disagreeing with GP. :)
Or :( I guess.
Comment by lnxg33k1 6 hours ago
these evil europeans wanting to have a break from work! how dare them!
Comment by kmeisthax 3 hours ago
On the European side, socialism is a question of who owns businesses. If the majority of businesses are owned by the people who are working at those businesses, you have a socialist economy. Welfare states, regulatory regimes, and high tax rates do not change the ownership of businesses, they are about who provides the infrastructure around those businesses. If you have an economy where infrastructure is owned by a liberal nation-state, and businesses are owned by whoever gambled capital on the venture, then you get a capitalist economy. If your infrastructure is privately owned by individuals, then those owners become feudal lords and you get feudalism.
On the Chinese side, you might point out that there are laws that require CCP ownership of all businesses, eat the party line that says the CCP is the representative of the working class, and say, "hey that's a socialism". But this ownership and representation is purely nominal. The average Chinese worker has more or less zero political agency; speaking out gets you censored and harassed. How is that worker ownership? If, say, America started punishing individual shareholders who voted against Trump-aligned board members, we'd correctly recognize that the shareholders do not meaningfully own their businesses anymore.
"Moving into Daddy Xi's house" would be stupid. The EU and China are not aligned on basically any core value; it'd basically be a surrender of one to the other. Actually, to be clear, the EU isn't even aligned on basically any core value with itself[0]. In fact, I would argue that's a way bigger headwind than European workers being used to a top-heavy welfare state. The EU has the resources to build a sovereign cloud, or run its own military, or source its own energy. But for each one there are challenges posed by the uniquely decentralized structure of Europe:
- Europe could build a sovereign cloud, but probably not one for each member state. So they're going to have to agree what country holds the data, and agree that that country can and will spy on all the others.
- Europe could fund its own military, tell NATO to pound sand, and re-colonize America for the trouble. But who runs that military? Given the history of EU politics, it would be France and Germany, and every other country in the EU has a history of being colonized by France or Germany. They are not trustworthy.
- Europe could fix its energy dependence, but Germany thinks nuclear power is Satan and wants to backstop renewables with the dirtiest-burning coal you can mine.
You'll notice a recurring theme here. The problem with Europe is not its fiscal deficit, the perceived laziness of its workers, or what have you. It's the lack of trust. The most trustworthy member state of the European Union was the United States of America, and so that's why everyone put their data on American servers, and let America dominate NATO, and so on. This is not Europe getting kicked out of the nest, it's the kids realizing their parent is a gaslighting asshole and that all their siblings, including themselves, are cut from the same cloth.
[0] Trump's current tariff actions and threats of territory annexation have galvanized the European public against America's government. However, prior to Trump coming back, Europe was full of far-right nutjobs that were just as cringe. Actually, a lot of them are still in power in Europe, and they're way more competent and cunning than Cheeto Mussolini.
Comment by victorbjorklund 6 hours ago
Comment by jamesblonde 12 hours ago
Comment by pembrook 12 hours ago
The tariffs are on European exports. The problem is Europe has a weak domestic consumer market and is dependent on selling stuff to the US, not buying from them.
Comment by microtonal 11 hours ago
[1] https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-cou...
Comment by jamesblonde 11 hours ago
The reason the US is not able to extract the same rents from China is that they have digital sovereignty and the US cannot just pull the cloud plug from them.
Comment by andsoitis 11 hours ago
What do you mean by "unilateral tariffs"?
> The reason the US is not able to extract the same rents from China is that they have digital sovereignty and the US cannot just pull the cloud plug from them.
The US has higher tariffs against Chinese imports than European imports.
Comment by Lapel2742 12 hours ago
Sure. They are not anti-Europe. They just announced that they want to topple democracy in our countries, destroy the European Union, want to annex a European territory and are best buddies with Vladimir Putin. But beside of that they are really good friends ... not!
Comment by MangoToupe 12 hours ago
Greenland is not in europe. It may be a danish colony but that doesn't make it "european territory" any more than french guiana is. EU territory? Sure. But europe is a penninsula on the western flank of eurasia.
Edit: huh I had no idea how complicated the classification of eu territories is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_territories_of_members...
Comment by andsoitis 12 hours ago
You are right that Greenland is not in Europe (it sits on the Nort American tectonic plate).
It is also not an EU territory, however, it is linked to Europea through Denmark. European influence exists through governance, education, and trade.
Most Greenlanders identify primarily as Kalaallit (Inuit) and Greenlandic, not European.
Comment by victorbjorklund 6 hours ago
Comment by MangoToupe 2 hours ago
Comment by nothrabannosir 33 minutes ago
I looked online but didn’t find any hard numbers, only vague movements. Scottish independence for example seems to have substantial , if minority , support. If the same cannot be said for Hawaii, then this comment feels… like a cop out.
Comment by tokai 7 hours ago
Comment by MangoToupe 7 hours ago
Comment by victorbjorklund 6 hours ago
Comment by MangoToupe 3 hours ago
But also, actually, if China did annex puerto rico? Snap snap snap. Good for them. They really made it out the hood. May god look upon the rest of us so positively
Comment by ulfw 11 hours ago
What kind of argument are you even trying to make?
Comment by MangoToupe 8 hours ago
Sure, no argument here.
> What kind of argument are you even trying to make?
Mostly that characterizing Greenland as European is just as insane as characterizing French Guiana that way. Or the falknlands, New Caledonia, Polynesia, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Aruba, Curaçao, Anguilla, Bermuda, the Virgin Islands, etc etc. These are colonies—not part of europe, and should have been made whole decades ago with the resolution of WWII, and their continued presence as "rightfully" part of European nations destabilizes our globe.
Europe is welcome to extend its economic privileges to all nations of earth, and I for one will continue to argue for kicking us out of Hawaii and Guam while ensuring we don't further engage in predatory trade agreements.
Of course, I don't expect any of this predation to cease anytime soon.
Comment by victorbjorklund 5 hours ago
Comment by drysine 11 hours ago
Comment by victorbjorklund 5 hours ago
Comment by drysine 5 hours ago
Comment by cess11 9 hours ago
Greenland has been inching towards independence since the seventies, because that's the common ambition of greenlandic peoples and it's slow because there are rather deep ties between Denmark and Greenland. These ties are to some extent very negative for the greenlanders, they're generally discriminated against and have been viciously mistreated at times, but a quick clean cut would also be quite painful for them.
In the seventies Greenland joined the EU predecessor EEC with Denmark, quickly realised that europeans were emptying their fishing waters and in the early eighties left the union. It's the only entity to have done so. Then the independence process trudged on, they self-manage in many areas now, even more since a 2008 referendum where some 75% or so voted in favour of independence. Since 2009 there is a law that says that Greenland can become independent whenever they want, as long as it's approved by greenlander referendum and the danish parliament.
To the extent they're a colony international law also clearly gives them the right to unilaterally declare independence. A majority of greenlanders are likely still in favour, but a majority also would prefer to postpone it if it would result in worse living conditions, since that's what polls usually conclude.
Ignoring half a century of rather delicate politics and independence ambitions the US shat all over it and said that they wanted to buy it, and then several years later said that they might just annex instead. This is quite belligerent and nasty behaviour, which in my opinion should have caused european countries to start dumping US bonds and stop answering calls from the White House.
Comment by MangoToupe 7 hours ago
Well nobody is forcing Denmark to be a dick about decolonization, nor a dick to all the people it never colonized. That's a choice.
> This is quite belligerent and nasty behaviour
So was colonizing, well, anywhere. Europe still hasn't been appropriately punished for this. And yes, the US deserves to be punished severely for its own brutal conquests.
Comment by notahacker 7 hours ago
Conversely, the leader of the present day United States threatens to colonising Greenland by force to show off how powerful he is. Ergo Europeans, particularly Greenlanders, have little reason to trust the US
Comment by MangoToupe 4 hours ago
Brother, spread this pro-colonization propaganda elsewhere.
> Conversely, the leader of the present day United States threatens to colonising Greenland by force to show off how powerful he is. Ergo Europeans, particularly Greenlanders, have little reason to trust the US
Conversely? Brother, they are the same thing.
Comment by tokai 7 hours ago
Comment by MangoToupe 4 hours ago
No need to act a clown. Greenland will never be european!
Comment by saubeidl 4 hours ago
Comment by jeltz 7 hours ago
Comment by cess11 7 hours ago
Well, some justice have been sought and won, but a lot remains. To me it seems like an attempt at distraction to clump together the treatment of the Mau Mau and the nuking of Algeria with Denmark's relation with Greenland.
Besides economic relations, independence for Greenland would also mean that they would need to seek justice to a larger extent through international courts and in at least some cases it's likely easier for greenlanders to find justice in danish courts.
Comment by MangoToupe 4 hours ago
> Well, some justice have been sought and won
And yet denmark hasn't burned. How do you remediate this contradiction?
> To me it seems like an attempt at distraction to clump together the treatment of the Mau Mau and the nuking of Algeria with Denmark's relation with Greenland.
Believe me, britain deserves far worse than just being burned down. But denmark still must face justice
Comment by Flatterer3544 3 hours ago
But yes agree, the elite extracting wealth from the colonies back in the days, and still are extracting wealth from your average Joe, deserves far worse.
Comment by Ray20 11 hours ago
Comment by stavros 11 hours ago
Why does the population matter at all? The US GDP is $30T and the EU GDP is $21T.
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
Comment by andsoitis 11 hours ago
What are you talking about? According to US intelligence agencies, bipartisan Senate reports, and federal prosecutions, Russia, China, and Iran have been singled out at running disinformation campaigns. The EU has never been accused by the US of trying to topple democracy in the US.
Comment by drysine 11 hours ago
The EU is buying resources from Russia, not providing aid to it.
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
Comment by drysine 5 hours ago
Comment by DaSHacka 4 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 12 hours ago
It was supposed to be something akin to United States of Europe, but instead in devolved into a bureaucracy that regulates the shit out if everything, is incredibly socialist and the EC thinks it is above everyone else.
Comment by victorbjorklund 5 hours ago
Comment by Lapel2742 12 hours ago
No, it never was.
> but instead in devolved into a bureaucracy
No it hasn't:
"There are two striking aspects of this rejection of EU bureaucracy. First, in comparison with other, comparable entities, such as the US federal bureaucracy, the EU’s administrative apparatus has a marginal size. Specifically, the EU, which is responsible for more than 440 million citizens, employs only around 60,000 people, while the US federal bureaucracy has more than two million employees that govern a territory with about 330 million inhabitants. Accordingly, the EU bureaucracy is comparatively small and far from being the “bureaucratic monster” which it is frequently portrayed as."
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2023/09/04/why-do-so-many...
> that regulates the shit out if everything,
I'm thankful for that. That is why our food is way better and way healthier than the shit the US makes it's citizens eat.
> is incredibly socialist and the EC thinks it is above everyone else.
LOL. No it's not "socialist" and the European Commission is the executive branch of the European Union. If you really think the Commission behaves as if they are above everything else (they do not!), I pull an American president.
Comment by andsoitis 12 hours ago
The US optimized for convenience, affordability, and variety.
You can eat very healthily in the US, but it requires more intentional choices. In many (not all) EU countries, the default option is closer to healthy.
Comment by Lapel2742 11 hours ago
It requires money too. If you are poor your choices are naturally limited and in the end you are dependent on government regulations to eat at least somewhat healthy.
Comment by andsoitis 11 hours ago
Yes, because the US optimizes for convenience, price, and variety, so you see more industrialized food.
On average, poor people in Europe eat healthier than poor people in the US, but still significantly worse than wealthier Europeans.
Comment by Lapel2742 11 hours ago
Sure. But in the end the EU feeds it's citizens healthier food than the US does. That's all I'm saying. I'm glad we have those regulations.
Comment by andsoitis 11 hours ago
What's interesting is JFK Jr. (our Secratary of Health and Human Services) has a stance that Americans eat too many ultra-processed foods. He wants people to eat more whole foods and fewer additives. He questions conventional warnings about saturated fat and supports dietary changes than include more full-fat dairy and meats. He prefers education over bans or mandates.
Comment by Lapel2742 10 hours ago
And that is not working for the poor of which the US seems to have plenty for a developed country.
The poor have no choice, even if they are educated, and the food industry is fine with selling them garbage. It's legal to do so after all. AFAIK food is generally even cheaper in Europe than in the USA. Even with those regulations.
Comment by blibble 11 hours ago
that's because the EU co-opted existing member state agencies instead of creating its own
e.g. the german federal department of agriculture effectively is controlled by the EU (almost all of its duties are an EU competence), but 100% of its costs are attributed to germany
this makes the EU look much more efficient than it is
Comment by watwut 9 hours ago
Comment by nephanth 12 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 8 hours ago
Comment by victorbjorklund 5 hours ago
Comment by nephanth 7 hours ago
Hell it pushes for free markets even when it makes very little sense (the eu electricity market and its weird idiosyncrasies are an artifact of that)
It basically bans member governments from printing money and imposes very strict limits of 3% GDP on government deficits. For reference the US deficit was 5.9% gdp this year, Almost twice as much. this greatly limits government control over the economy.
Comment by rdm_blackhole 6 hours ago
You might want to check that information. This very strict limit is only enforced on selective EU countries like Greece for example.
France has had routinely yearly deficits above 3% in the last 10 years and has never been worried one bit about it.
For the record the French deficit was around 5.4% this year and it is set to increase again next year as the parliament is completely blocked and a budget compromise cannot be reached.
Even the so called debt ceiling defined in the pact of stability is mostly ignored. Italy and France are both well above the 100% debt to GDP ratio when the treaty says that every country within the EU should be at or below 60%.
> It basically bans member governments from printing money
It only bans the ones that have adopted the Euro. The countries that have declined to adopt the euro are free to do as they please more or less.
The euro countries though may not be able to print money, but they just get the ECB to do it for them via quantitative easing which has been used since 2008 and only recently stopped when the interests rates started climbing after the pandemic.
Comment by jeltz 7 hours ago
Comment by pembrook 12 hours ago
Comment by alphager 12 hours ago
Comment by mlrtime 12 hours ago
There is no conspiracy, sorry.
Comment by pembrook 11 hours ago
Comment by carlosjobim 12 hours ago
Comment by phatfish 11 hours ago
Opinion polls on actually leaving the EU show a minority in favour. Most Europeans saw Brexit play out and realise sticking the finger up at your neighbours is not a winning strategy.
Comment by carlosjobim 5 hours ago
Comment by andsoitis 12 hours ago
Your framing is off, I'm afraid.
Across Europe, most people see the EU as more good than bad, especially compared to the alternative of countries acting alone. At the same time, support is often cautious rather than enthusiastic.
Comment by nephihaha 11 hours ago
I had hoped that the UK would vote to remain and Europe would move away from a centralist, authoritarian model, but it's got worse especially since 2020. The EU is its own worst enemy.
Comment by andsoitis 11 hours ago
EU is authoritarian? Why do you think that?
Comment by nephihaha 10 hours ago
Comment by tmnvix 2 hours ago
It would seem to me that the recent spate of sanctioning individuals - e.g. for 'disseminating misinformation' without a legal definition of what that actually is would be an example of authoritarianism. A direct attack on freedom of speech and thought.
Comment by watwut 9 hours ago
Comment by nephihaha 6 hours ago
The EU has its fair share of corruption, but it is is better at hiding it than developing countries. Its current president Ursula Von Der Leyen is a fraud who appears to have cheated at university, and only got to where she did due to wealth and aristocratic family connections.
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
Comment by jeltz 7 hours ago
Comment by rdm_blackhole 6 hours ago
It was pushed by Sweden but also by many other countries including France (which loves to give lessons of democracy to the world by the way and is very much at the forefront of human rights or so they say) and Hungary amongst others.
> has consistently lost in the Parliament.
It has consistently lost so far. Secondly the reason it has lost is because people like me took the time to actually reach out to any MEP who would take my call to tell them to oppose this law. If we had waited for the EU to react and put a stop to this madness, we would still be waiting.
This law should never have been proposed in the first place anyway. The fact that it was proposed and debated is a shameful action in itself.
> I know things would have been much worse without the EU.
How can you know for sure? You can't. Since it originated from the EU commission, it stands to reason that without the EU commission it would not have happened.
You believe that the EU is good because that is your belief. The European countries existed for 100s of years before the EU. There is no reason to think that they can't go back to this state in the future.
Comment by carlosjobim 8 hours ago
But I haven't lived in central Europe, like Germany, Belgium, etc. Where the attitudes seem to be quite pro-EU.
The original statement still stands. Europe is not the EU. The EU is not Europe.
Comment by pezezin 46 minutes ago
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
https://news.gallup.com/poll/657860/member-states-show-stron...
Comment by Lapel2742 11 hours ago
Maybe you should get out of your right-wing bubble.
- EU approval among its citizens hits record high as security fears grow, poll shows (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-approval-among-its-c...)
- Nearly three quarters of EU citizens (74%) say that, taking everything into account, their country has benefited from being a member of the EU. (https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3378)
Comment by nephihaha 11 hours ago
There are things I like about the EU, but it also has some things horribly wrong.
Comment by Lapel2742 10 hours ago
Compared to the USA it still is.
Comment by nephihaha 9 hours ago
Americans take homeschooling for granted, for better or worse, but it is banned in some European countries like Germany.
Also the USA allows groups such as the Amish their liberty, which would be extremely unlikely in much of the EU where state interference would either force them out or destroy them.
The US has umpteen issues but is much better for freedom of expression frankly, although it is being steered away from that.
Comment by watwut 9 hours ago
EU is not demanding 5 yeara of social media public from kids entering in.
EU is not killing fisherman to feel manly.
EU is overall more democratic and more free. The parts that sux Hungary and Slovakia dont sux because of EU, but despite it.
It is ok for Germany to not have homeschooling.
Comment by nephihaha 6 hours ago
The EU and USA are going down the same road. Social media is a part of this censorship of open discussion and is usually American based, but works hand in hand with the European governments. Both European and American governments seem happy to deceive citizens into a surveillance state.
It is unacceptable to ban homeschooling. Some children need to be homeschooled, because of disabilities, or even high intelligence. Given the fact that Germany has suffered from both far right and far left dictatorships within living memory, anything that does not promote blind obedience to the state should be encouraged.
Many parts of Europe retain a feudal mentality, which includes constant deference to authority.
Comment by mopsi 4 hours ago
> There are a lot of things you can't say or will get shut down for.
Such as? I honestly can't think of anything. > It is unacceptable to ban homeschooling. Some children need to be homeschooled, because of disabilities, or even high intelligence.
European education laws prioritize the child's right to education and social development over parental autonomy as an absolute. Mandatory schooling laws have been adopted to ensure minimum educational standards and to safeguard against neglect and abuse, which is especially important when it comes to disabilities. Someone with proper training and decades of experience will educate a disabled child far more effectively than a parent whose only guaranteed qualification may be knowing how to have sex.Comment by jenadine 2 hours ago
Well, we can't say them.
(but it involves nazies, denying genocides, hate speech, and this kind of stuff. It also depends on the country)
Comment by tmnvix 1 hour ago
Jacques Baud, recently sanctioned by the EU for promoting conspiracy theories. https://data.europa.eu/apps/eusanctionstracker/subjects/1802...
Comment by mopsi 50 minutes ago
Comment by carlosjobim 2 hours ago
As for neglect and abuse of children, the public schools is where you will most readily find it. Including bullying until children commit suicide. And school shootings. Which is a lesser risk at home. No matter which continent.
Comment by 8note 1 hour ago
Comment by carlosjobim 5 hours ago
> Maybe you should get out of your right-wing bubble.
Your comment is nasty, but I don't think you're this nasty in real life. Probably you're just blowing off some steam online.
Comment by ulfw 10 hours ago
Comment by carlosjobim 5 hours ago
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
What do you mean it's not anti-Europe? It's literally trying to destroy our shared institutions!
Comment by andsoitis 11 hours ago
The official 2025 NSS document does not explicitly state a US goal to dismantle the European Union.
The strategy is highly critical of the EU's direction and Europe's trajectory in ways that critics could say could indirectly undermine EU cohesion, but there's no formal language saying the US wants to dismantle the EU.
Critics interpret the tone and strategic shift as potentially indirectly weakening EU cohesion if taken as encouragement to nationalist or Eurosceptic political forces.
Comment by saubeidl 11 hours ago
Comment by pembrook 12 hours ago
Also, Europe is doing a fine job harming our shared institutions all on its own, we don’t need any help in that department.
Comment by systemBuilder 12 hours ago
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
Comment by jeltz 7 hours ago
Comment by DaSHacka 4 hours ago
Comment by blibble 2 hours ago
trump pissing away a century of hard-won soft power handed the century to China
Comment by LadyCailin 12 hours ago
Comment by MangoToupe 12 hours ago
Comment by mannykannot 11 hours ago
It is helpful to have the document publicly available, but only if enough people heed its implicit warning.
Comment by MangoToupe 10 hours ago
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
To say they're not anti-Europe is either hopelessly naive or cynically ideologically aligned with their goals.
Comment by mlrtime 12 hours ago
AFG are Neonazis?
Comment by jrochkind1 11 hours ago
and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany#German...
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/19/turmoil-in-ger...
https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/dangerous-liais...
Comment by drysine 11 hours ago
Times Of Israel[0]:
"The criticism came one day after Ukrainians marked the 111th birthday of Stepan Bandera, the wartime leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), a violently anti-Semitic organization that collaborated with the Nazis. Among Holocaust historians, the consensus is that the OUN and its military offshoot, known as the UPA, were responsible for the deaths of thousands of Jews and up to 100,000 Poles during the war (estimates vary).
In a joint letter to civic leaders in Lviv and Kyiv, Israeli ambassador Joel Lion and his Polish counterpart, Bartosz Cichocki, expressed concern regarding efforts to honor Bandera and Andryi Melnyk, the head of a competing faction of the OUN.
In Kyiv on Wednesday, local officials raised a giant banner with Bandera’s picture over the city administration building, prompting anger from Jewish activists. That came just over a week after the Lviv Oblast Council approved funding for a 2020 celebration in honor of Melnyk.
Israel and Poland, which have clashed repeatedly in recent years over differing interpretations of the history of the Second World War, came together on Thursday to issue a rare joint condemnation of Ukraine over its efforts to rehabilitate nationalists who collaborated with the Nazis.
The criticism came one day after Ukrainians marked the 111th birthday of Stepan Bandera, the wartime leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), a violently anti-Semitic organization that collaborated with the Nazis. Among Holocaust historians, the consensus is that the OUN and its military offshoot, known as the UPA, were responsible for the deaths of thousands of Jews and up to 100,000 Poles during the war (estimates vary).
In a joint letter to civic leaders in Lviv and Kyiv, Israeli ambassador Joel Lion and his Polish counterpart, Bartosz Cichocki, expressed concern regarding efforts to honor Bandera and Andryi Melnyk, the head of a competing faction of the OUN.
In Kyiv on Wednesday, local officials raised a giant banner with Bandera’s picture over the city administration building, prompting anger from Jewish activists. That came just over a week after the Lviv Oblast Council approved funding for a 2020 celebration in honor of Melnyk.
“Remembering our innocent brothers and sisters murdered in the occupied territories of Poland 1935-1945, which now constitute a part of Ukraine, we the Ambassadors of Poland and Israel believe, that celebrating these individuals is an insult,” Lion and Cichocki wrote.
“Glorification of those who promoted actively the ethnic cleansing is counterproductive in the fight against Antisemitism and the reconciliation of our People,” they continued.
...
Thursday’s letter is the second time that Lion and Cichocki have come together to call for a change in Ukrainian memory policy. In June, the pair signed a joint letter to the mayor of the Ukrainian city of Ivano-Frankisvsk, protesting the unveiling of a monument honoring Roman Shukhevych, a collaborator with the Nazis who was implicated in the murder of countless Jews and ethnic Poles.
Following Ukraine’s 2014 revolution, the former Soviet republic’s parliament passed a series of bills known collectively as the Decommunization Laws, meant to sever the country’s ties to its Russian and Soviet past. One of the bills prohibited what it called the “public denial of the legitimacy of the struggle for independence of Ukraine in the twentieth century.”
In practical terms, these bills paved the way for the rehabilitation of Ukrainian ultranationalist figures who had collaborated with the Nazis.
Over the last several years, streets all over Ukraine have been named after far-right figures and steps have been taken to rehabilitate their images, casting them as fighters for democracy whose followers saved Jews from the Germans.
Asked about the letter, Ambassador Lion told The Times of Israel that Israel and Poland “have a common interest in combating Holocaust denial and rewriting of History.” "
[0] https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-row-over-holocaust-history-...
Comment by Amezarak 12 hours ago
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
It's a result of deliberate media manipulation and hybrid warfare by the US and Russia.
Comment by MangoToupe 12 hours ago
Comment by Amezarak 12 hours ago
Well, foreign intervention and propaganda in democracies is nothing new. It is well documented all the way back to the time of ancient Greece.
So your contention is that in Germany and perhaps other countries (France?) some of the most popular political parties are popular only because their partisans are uneducated dupes or worse, in thrall to foreign powers. Perhaps you would be better off ideologically not supporting democracy - it sounds like it is not for you. Of course democracy has its problems - and people voting for dumb ideas is one of them!
You can either accept that it's your duty to convince your citizens you are right to win their votes, or you can insist that everyone else is wrong and democracy means they should shut up and vote only the "right" way in accordance with establishment approved opinions and go about what Europe has been doing, which is to continue to pursue unpopular policies and blame Russiia/nazis/America/the Internet/free speech for their problems.
European center and left parties could suck all the oxygen out of the room and starve the far-right overnight if they simply introduced and enforced major immigration restrictions - but it's precisely this which is not a Establishment Approved Idea and deemed Unthinkable Hate. Democracy, as long as your opinions are allowed.
Comment by MangoToupe 7 hours ago
Economic suicide. Why would anyone argue for this? Europe might as well just nuke itself.
Granted, if I were a conservative European, I would also be pro nuking myself.
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
I don't! I think authoritarian leftism is the way to go as most people are too stupid for their own good tbh.
Comment by fifilura 11 hours ago
Dealing with this was a big problem already, the US policy is just a not-very-welcome frosting on the cake in this respect.
Comment by ExoticPearTree 12 hours ago
Comment by microtonal 11 hours ago
I would be very surprised if this type of speech is allowed/tolerated on HN.
Comment by ExoticPearTree 11 hours ago
So now the truth is not tolerated because it hurts somebody’s feelings?
Comment by saubeidl 10 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 9 hours ago
Comment by saubeidl 7 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 6 hours ago
Comment by saubeidl 3 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 57 minutes ago
Comment by saubeidl 28 minutes ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 12 hours ago
The EU needs to be gone and try again something like this in a generation or two, with more emphasis on competition, development and creativity, rather than regulation and socialism.
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
The EU parliament has a conservative majority [0], as does the Council. [1]
It's a right-wing organization. I wish there was socialism, mate.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_European_Parliament#Curr...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union#...
Comment by ExoticPearTree 9 hours ago
Right now in politics you can claim to be whatever you want and your policy stance to be opposite: I am on the right but I vote left wing measures.
Comment by 8note 1 hour ago
what ownership control does the state have over the means of production?
Comment by saubeidl 7 hours ago
Left wing would be the state owning the means of production.
Comment by mathgradthrow 9 hours ago
Comment by burkaman 9 hours ago
Comment by jeltz 7 hours ago
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
"The US is gonna have their FO moment aaaany day now, they're gonna regret messing with us Europeans!"
"Bro you haven't even kept your end of the deal on your NATO military spending."
Turns out despite all the hubub, the 'superpower' fading the fastest was Europe after all.
Comment by bogeholm 9 hours ago
The linked articles are not about NATO obligations.
Comment by ExoticPearTree 12 hours ago
Using this logic, every country should develop its own critical equipment from scratch, in terms of both hardware and software.
My belief is that there is no problem with the Chinese equipment, just scare-mongering from the US because it has no manufacturer of 5G equipment. And Europe jumped on the bandwagon just because.
Comment by arrrg 12 hours ago
The issue is the US burning up that earned mutual trust. And at some point you have to sadly abandon ship. Cooperation is great, trade is great, but not under all circumstances and all the time.
Comment by BSDobelix 11 hours ago
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/us-spy-agency-tapped-g...
Trusting the US should be considered a problem since decades.
Comment by HolyLampshade 10 hours ago
The issue has less to do with intelligence silliness, and more to do with the fact that the overall geopolitical objectives of the US can not be trusted, and that rift has grown to a point where self-reliance on critical infrastructure may be in Europe’s best interest.
Comment by bayindirh 8 hours ago
Comment by BSDobelix 5 hours ago
The cracked encryption was not given to "friends" but country's like Libya
Comment by bayindirh 4 hours ago
US started to eavesdrop on Turkey and Greece first. Germany pulled out of the project by citing this is going too far for them. Some citations from news:
The Germans were taken aback by the Americans’ willingness to spy on all but their closest allies, with targets including NATO members Spain, Greece, Turkey and Italy [0].
Operation Rubicon [1] has a map of spied countries, incl. NATO allies and "friends".
I failed to find that great long-read article. If I can find, I will attach it here, too.
[0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/national-...
Comment by re-thc 11 hours ago
Comment by arrrg 11 hours ago
Comment by re-thc 9 hours ago
> lose your ability to differentiate in your cynical zeal to cast everyone as
Somehow calling 1 party out fits your example? Where is the everyone? In no way do I think everyone or every country is evil.
Contrary, yours is a clear example of a superficial take on everything.
Comment by darubedarob 10 hours ago
Comment by Angostura 10 hours ago
Comment by darubedarob 8 hours ago
Comment by throw0101c 12 hours ago
> Using this logic, every country should develop its own critical equipment from scratch, in terms of both hardware and software.
The logic is don't use infrastructure of people you don't trust. If Europeans don't trust Chinese, then don't use Chinese infra; if the Europeans don't trust the US (anymore), then don't use US infra. The Europeans could trust the Canadians, and use Canadian infra for example.
Comment by locknitpicker 7 hours ago
I'm seeing the EU being singled out as unreasonable for avoiding the risk represented by buying their whole infrastructure from companies with deep and blatant ties to CCP's armed forces.
Somehow these critics are omitting the fact that most of the world, specially asian countries, have also banned them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concerns_over_Chinese_involvem...
Comment by rapnie 11 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 9 hours ago
Comment by ninalanyon 6 hours ago
Comment by xethos 8 hours ago
Comment by strangegecko 12 hours ago
It's not that each country needs to develop their own, but it is prudent to not depend on those who have a fundamentally different and incompatible world view.
Comment by throw310822 10 hours ago
Let's also say that democracy is very important internally. But as a EU citizen (or even better as a middle east citizen) whether they're democratic or authoritarian makes very little difference to me- I don't get a say in what they do. And in the case of the ME, it wasn't China or its allies that reduced several countries to rubble, it was the democratic US.
> it is prudent to not depend on those who have a fundamentally different and incompatible world view
There are no such things as "incompatible world view" but certainly closer or more distant ones. And I think the fundamental values of the US are pretty far away from those of the EU.
Comment by kelvinjps10 9 hours ago
Comment by throw310822 9 hours ago
Comment by ben_w 9 hours ago
Between nations, if that were so, no trade relationship would be possible between your go-to examples of each.
Comment by klabb3 11 hours ago
Like Saudi Arabia and formerly the Saddam regime (when he sold oil in USD)?
While compatible world view is used as an argument against diplomatic and economic relations, in reality it’s just a bonus, not a requirement. What’s important is plain old cost benefit and national interests. The US is still a better ally for EU than China, but it’s gotten drastically worse fast. And while China has territorial ambitions, they are nowhere near EU. The US is the good old status quo ”devil you know”, but it’s abundantly evident now that nobody really knew them, including many of their own political elites domestically.
On diplomacy timescales, ignoring China because of human rights concerns is exceptionally short-sighted, both for EU if US continues current path, and for global stability in case conflicts escalate between China and US. There is no choice that guarantees EU will have a strong ”human rights” ally in 10 years.
Comment by re-thc 11 hours ago
Comment by Jon_Lowtek 4 hours ago
Comment by tw04 11 hours ago
Even if that were accurate, which it isn’t, what exactly do you think the US stands to gain by Europe buying 5g from someone other than China (like the European providers Ericsson and nokia)?
Comment by ExoticPearTree 9 hours ago
Secondly, it stops China gaining as much experience in this field as it could have.
Comment by ulfw 11 hours ago
Huawei became very competitive to Apple. Outsold Apple in it's home market. Huawei got banned.
DJI has a near monopoly on drones. No US company could compete and players like GoPro shut down their consumer drone projects. DJI got/is about to get banned.
Tiktok was dangerous to Meta. TikTok got almost banned/forced-sold.
Chinese EVs are better than almost any US offering. Chinese EVs got banned (by 100%+ tarrifs on them).
Sale of AI and Chips to China got banned. No ChatGPT or Claude offered to us here in Hong Kong.
This is all the US Tech sector can do now. Short term this will go very well but long term this leads to the US falling behind and behind because American companies have artificially created barriers where they aren't forced to comepete anymore, meanwhile the world moves on and has a competitive environment. Innovation will move faster Ex-USA
I fly a DJI Mini 5 Pro, use a Huawei Freeclip 2 earphone, a Huawei GT6 watch, a Xiaomi Silicon Carbon powerbank, an Oppo Find N5 foldable. Most are better/unique compared to what you can even get in America. And that's only the beginning. That's only 2025.
Comment by andsoitis 11 hours ago
How would you explain Samsung, LG, Sony, etc.?
> DJI got banned.
Untrue.
Supply is constrained and future of new product availability is uncertain because of FY2025 National Defesnse Authorization ACt, which requires a security audit by late Dec 2025. If that doesn't happen, DJI could automatically be added to the FCC's restricted list, which could block new products from being certified and sold in the US.
In the meantime, for sale at Best Buy, Adorama, B&H, Walmart, etc. e.g. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1737927-REG/dji_cp_ma...
> Sale of AI and Chips to China got banned.
Your argument is that US tech companies do not have the ability to compete, but this example doesn't support your claim; in fact it does the opposite.
But even so, your information is out of date. Nvidia is now allowed to sell its advanced H200 AI chips to China. The whiplash is dumb, but the move is aimed at maintaining US AI leadership, support American jobs, while addressing concerns about China's military AI development.
Comment by beAbU 10 hours ago
And this is coming from someone who has owned multiple Samsungs over the years.
Comment by kelnos 10 hours ago
Comment by ulfw 10 hours ago
What you're talking about is social networks/messengers/news which are limited not so much for competitive reasons but national security reasons. They like to control what people see which is something a Google, Meta or X cannot guarantee.
You can very much buy US software, e.g. https://www.microsoft.com/zh-cn/microsoft-365/buy/microsoft-... etc.
You can buy a Prada bag, a Ralph Lauren sweater, the newest iPhone or Mac, a Model Y, adidas or Nikes, Adobe Photoshop... etc etc
Comment by filoleg 5 hours ago
Not sure how that statement squares against the fact that a lot of major US stores (Amazon, Target, Costco, Walmart, B&H Photo, Microcenter, etc.) have DJI products available for purchase, as well as that there is literally a physical retail DJI store[0] within a ~20min subway ride away from my apartment in the US.
Comment by watwut 9 hours ago
USA claims and treats Europe as the ennemy. Not every country treats every other country as the ennemy.
USA is, right now vicious and less trustworthy then China. Which is unfortunate cause China is not trustworthy.
Comment by flumpcakes 15 hours ago
I don't see this news as anything but a good thing. For every technology out there, the EU needs a native alternative. It's clear the current US administration wants to make the EU worse based on a politics of grievance.
Comment by jimnotgym 15 hours ago
What we also need is a faster acceleration of military spending so this can happen with more companies.
Comment by ExoticPearTree 11 hours ago
They are not. It can hurt Airbus very much if a provider says they can provide a certain level of hardware/software for 10 years and in three years the RAM or storage goes through the roof and the provider is not big enough to absorb all the losses.
People don’t choose the hyperscalers because they are based in the US, they choose them because they are too big to fail and have pretty much unlimited resources and have multiplr streams of revenue.
Comment by jimnotgym 11 hours ago
Comment by everfrustrated 8 hours ago
Comment by filoleg 5 hours ago
Yeah, and that's a fine vehicle for insuring against this risk for a finance company or for an individual.
I am prepared to be wrong on the following take (as it is based on nothing more than just "it came to me in a dream"), but my hunch is that neither Airbus nor the EU state governments are currently even attempting to hedge the RAM price risk by accumulating a RAM futures stash on the market.
Comment by bambax 14 hours ago
Comment by kakacik 14 hours ago
Long term, I agree with you.
Comment by anovikov 12 hours ago
Comment by jenadine 2 hours ago
They will not be very useful in a conflict against the US, since the US can basically disable them remotely.
Comment by aziaziazi 9 hours ago
Comment by hulitu 14 hours ago
Comment by nosianu 14 hours ago
Made in a few Asian countries. I think it's kind of funny reading the contents of your post and how it ignores Asia, that's actually behind most of it. How much of a Dell PC is US-American?
Comment by Lapel2742 12 hours ago
Using European technology (ASML).
Comment by jimnotgym 14 hours ago
Anyhow it is clear the protection is not to be relied upon, so it is time to stop paying. It is dangerous making deals with gangsters. It is perhaps more dangerous to change the deal. But when the protection is not there, it is time to build strength.
Well done to France for maintaining its independent nuclear deterrent through this era. Britain made a mistake letting that go
Comment by JumpCrisscross 10 hours ago
No. The Marshall Plan was about rebuilding Europe so it could be a military ally against the Soviet Union. The trade stuff came afterwards.
Comment by jimnotgym 8 hours ago
Comment by tonyedgecombe 14 hours ago
https://thebulletin.org/premium/2024-11/united-kingdom-nucle...
Comment by jimnotgym 11 hours ago
Comment by mlrtime 12 hours ago
Comment by saubeidl 12 hours ago
Comment by tacker2000 14 hours ago
The US has a long history of funding the Silicon Valley expansion using Darpa and other federal agencies for example.
Europe never had such a thing, and they had a fragmented market for a long time.
The big money is in the US, thats why the talent goes there.
Comment by digitalengineer 14 hours ago
Comment by tacker2000 14 hours ago
Yes, the www was created at Cern, but this is only a small part of the whole tech industry and history as a whole.
Also before that, Arpanet, the precursor of the Internet, was created and funded in the US by the military and the top unis.
Comment by f1shy 14 hours ago
Is just one little stone in a gigantic castle made in the united states. I’m European, and I think is just silly to look who “invented” each thing, trying to feel patriotic about that. Every invention is based on other inventions, research, ideas and necessities around the world. Trying to put flags on it, is just stupid.
Comment by blitzar 12 hours ago
Comment by saubeidl 13 hours ago
Where was binary logic invented? Where was boolean algebra invented? Where was the turing machine invented?
Hell, we can go back even further. Where would any of this be without Aristotle?
Of course, this castle has been built by many many stones. But I think it's fair to say most stones came from Europe.
Comment by tacker2000 12 hours ago
The fact is the US and China are steamrolling us with their IT companies since decades.
We need to wake up and do it ourselves.
Comment by f1shy 10 hours ago
Because I was talking about this “internet was invented in CERN”, which is just not a little bit true
About the rest: So what?! Thanks Thanks Europe and Europeans!! We just killed 6 Mio. Judes and burned people in the middle ages… but wait. We invented the Web!!! And we can forget everything that came from Asia and middle East also. All is our merit!!! Again, my point is it is stupid to say some country invented X.
What kind of cheap chauvinism is that? Please give me a break. Many things where invented everywhere in the world, and I could not care less, because that will not make me better or worse because of being part of a country which borders were defined not 100 years ago.
The starting point of this thread in HN is about starting to develop some kind of digital independence, because frankly, the EU may have GDPR, but in everything else is much worse and stuck like 5 decades ago.
Comment by atoav 14 hours ago
Comment by rurban 14 hours ago
Comment by mschuster91 14 hours ago
Comment by rurban 12 hours ago
Fuchsia never made it widescale. They started a couple of years before the Chinese and then got stuck
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
> supporting both tablet mode and full desktop counterpart in line with Huawei MateBook
I'm sorry, "MateBook"? Lol, I wonder where they possibly got the idea for that name from.
Comment by pyrale 14 hours ago
s/laziness and stupidity/corruption/g
See, for instance, what happened to Gemalto.
Comment by unmole 14 hours ago
This is a disingenuous straw man. The allies are derided for literally freeloading on US military protection while underinvesting in their own defense.
Comment by jimnotgym 14 hours ago
My country spends less on defence as a percentage of GDP than the US. But it spends much of that with US companies. This is not Freeloading. It was a deal. Cancel TSR-2, and buy American and we will lend you some money. Cancel your nuclear program and buy US submarine launched missiles and we will help you look after yourself. Now let Visa and Mastercard skim off all your transactions and we will keep you secure to keep the money flowing. Sweetheart tax deals for US companies to operate, and we will keep you safe to keep the money flowing. It is not Freeloading, it is colonialism
Comment by mlrtime 12 hours ago
Comment by LightBug1 13 hours ago
Comment by oliwarner 14 hours ago
The US isn't anywhere close to paying its way.
Comment by hshdhdhj4444 13 hours ago
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5656174-trump-si...
> The bill approves a record $901 billion in military spending for fiscal 2026
Oh…
Comment by xorcist 13 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 11 hours ago
Nobody is forcing Europe to allow people without visas in. Building a eall and shooting on site anyone who crosses it is a very simple and effective method of keeping immigration in check.
But no, the EU seems hellbent on destroying itself by allowing all kinds of savages through its borders.
Comment by jeltz 7 hours ago
Comment by avianlyric 7 hours ago
Ah yes a wall, like that famously effective one that Trump built. Tell me has US managed to actually finish it yet?
Comment by saubeidl 10 hours ago
Comment by alephnerd 8 hours ago
Yet we as Americans are the savages.
European civil society needs to drop this charade of moralizing and being "rules based". The reality is EU policymakers are equally as mercurial and open to making deals with devils. The issue is a subset of you guys have a weird form of "white saviourship" and sense of exceptionalism.
Finally, a plurality of us Americans either never had or no longer have blood ties with Europe. As an Asian American who used to work om the Hill, I myself and my peers increasingly ignore or overlook Europe despite having went to college with a number of your up-and-coming decisionmakers. In 2025, the majority of us Americans are Latino, Black, Mixed, Asian, or multi-generational White American.
Any positive historical ties we had with Europe (in reality, a fluke from 1939-2011) was because of 1.5 gen Central and Eastern European immigrants turned NatSec Advisers like Kissinger (German), Albright (Czech), and Brzezinski (Polish). From a soft power perspective, when we don't look inward we increasingly look to Latin America or Asia. And economically as well - our total trade with all of Europe is barely $975B compared to $1.5T with all of the Americas and around $2-2.5T with Asia.
[0] - https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/the-eu-turkey...
[1] - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/05/eu-dea...
[2] - https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-06-01/mass-arr...
Comment by Amezarak 11 hours ago
Comment by throw0101c 12 hours ago
1. No one forced the US to spend a bajillion dollars on defense.
2. The US did so out of their own free will, and out of self-interest: their power hegemony allowed for peaceful trade routes that benefited the US economy and US corporations.
3. Their own defense against what? What threats, until fairly recently, did the Europeans face that they needed to spend money protecting against?
Comment by baq 5 hours ago
Same ones the US built the most expensive army in the world to defend against
Comment by tonyedgecombe 14 hours ago
Comment by Wilder7977 12 hours ago
A Europe with an independent defense is dangerous competition for the US. Maybe it means that some international trade will be done in Euro. Maybe it means foreign policies in Europe's interests.
Comment by esperent 13 hours ago
Comment by Sammi 13 hours ago
Comment by apelapan 12 hours ago
Comment by fulafel 10 hours ago
Comment by apelapan 1 hour ago
I'm sure some people use the term correctly, at least sometimes!
Comment by Sammi 11 hours ago
Actually I'd say "cloud" says more about the business model than it says about the actual product.
Comment by everfrustrated 8 hours ago
Comment by TrickyRick 13 hours ago
Comment by tormeh 11 hours ago
Comment by mk89 4 hours ago
How good/bad it is, I have zero expertise.
Comment by jamesblonde 12 hours ago
Comment by itopaloglu83 12 hours ago
Comment by jillesvangurp 14 hours ago
People over pay for AWS mostly because of brand recognition. And it's not even small amounts. You get a lot more CPU/memory/bandwidth with some of the competitors. AWS makes money by squeezing their customers hard on that. Competitors do the obvious thing of being a bit more generous. Companies could save a ton just switching to competing solutions. Try it. It's not that hard. Some solutions are obviously not as complete.
This not about US vs. EU but about sovereignty. If you are married to AWS, that's a weakness in itself. Ask yourself how hard it would be to move to Google cloud. Or Azure. Or whatever. If that's very hard, you might have a problem when Amazon jacks up the prices or discontinues a product.
We use a mix of Google Cloud and Telekom Cloud for some of our more picky customers in Germany. Telekom Cloud is not very glamorous. But it's essentially openstack. Which is an open source thing backed by IBM and others. I wouldn't necessary recommend Telekom Cloud (it has a few weaknesses in support and documentation). But it does the job. And unlike AWS, I can get people on the phone and they are happy to talk to me.
Comment by general1465 14 hours ago
I have tried Lambdas and then got this "oh-shit moment" when I have realized that if AWS would be to kick me out, I would be absolutely screwed.
Now I am slowly dispersing and using VMs instead and avoiding all the AWS-specific stuff as much as I can.
Comment by reese_john 13 hours ago
IMO the lock-in fear is overblown as the top cloud offerings (S3, Lambdas, K8s as a service etc) are already commoditized among the top providers, the exception being specialized databases like DynamoDB, Spanner, Cosmos …
Not saying there wouldn’t be some major work to switch your operations from eg AWS to GCP, but it is also not a hard lock-in
Comment by jacquesm 13 hours ago
Comment by keepamovin 11 hours ago
Comment by tormeh 11 hours ago
Comment by everfrustrated 8 hours ago
Comment by keepamovin 8 hours ago
Comment by keepamovin 11 hours ago
Comment by tormeh 9 hours ago
Comment by pyrale 9 hours ago
Comment by selkin 5 hours ago
Comment by thdrtol 13 hours ago
Airbus has the ability to move their data to another location, but it is very problemetic that all people with a social account can't. Sure, you can delete your Facebook account but it will take years for you profile to be gone because we all know your data is sold to other parties.
My only option is to keep in mind that everything I put online will one day be read by some evil entity. Even my IP address that Hacker News might store (I don't know, but servers log stuff).
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
I know, watching the fall of the UK and European countries has been really depressing to see. It's unfortunate, but it seems the US will have to carry the torch alone going into the mid-to-late 21st century.
Comment by thdrtol 7 hours ago
Comment by Havoc 12 hours ago
Half a billion people shouldn't be reliant on whether a guy with clown makeup is having a dementia moment.
Key infra (gov, utilities, news etc) has to be in house or at least in a EU country. Actually in house not big tech EU "sovereign" cloud wink wink nudge
Comment by ExoticPearTree 10 hours ago
For some EU functionalities there is eu-lisa which develops and hosts services - mostly for police, immigration, biometrics and a slew of others.
The problem is that they are very closed environments with a lot if bureaucracy involved and the development is done at snail pace.
Comment by DaSHacka 8 hours ago
Wow, so they're authentically European! Glad to see they're off to a great start.
Comment by _ache_ 15 hours ago
Comment by hulitu 14 hours ago
And how do we fight terrorists, CSAM and political opponents without Palantir ?
Comment by bambax 14 hours ago
Fighting "CSAM" is absurd and ridiculous, and used as a justification for eroding public liberties. So is the fight against "terrorism".
The US government has decided to kill innocent fishermen en masse and labelled its victims "narco-terrorists" as a justification for these crimes.
We absolutely do not need Palantir.
Comment by dzhiurgis 13 hours ago
Labelling like this works both ways you know.
Comment by t43562 14 hours ago
Comment by j_maffe 12 hours ago
Comment by pyrale 9 hours ago
Comment by general1465 14 hours ago
You can make exactly same argument for client (phone) scanning and depreciation of encryption.
Comment by mschuster91 14 hours ago
By doing police legwork and by prevention work (i.e. offer help to pedophiles, don't go and wreck MENA countries for funsies, but invest in helping the civilian populations).
Comment by _ache_ 14 hours ago
Comment by TeMPOraL 14 hours ago
Comment by _ache_ 14 hours ago
I'm talking about the Skywise data platform.
https://www.aircraft.airbus.com/en/services/enhance/skywise-...
Comment by kachapopopow 6 hours ago
Comment by wrxd 14 hours ago
It would be nice to know what the requirements are. There are plenty of providers in the EU happy to sell cloud services
Comment by mft_ 14 hours ago
Don’t they know you can get Hetzner servers starting from $5/month?
Comment by zrn900 56 minutes ago
Comment by Imustaskforhelp 14 hours ago
Comment by AndroTux 13 hours ago
Comment by Imustaskforhelp 13 hours ago
(searching more I found Koyeb, bunny cdn offers deno similar to cloudflare workers)
Comment by AndroTux 2 hours ago
Comment by Imustaskforhelp 45 minutes ago
I do not know about the others but OVH (even with all of its flaws) is definitely a cloud provider
I got so damn overwhelmed looking at all the services offered by OVH once and I found some niche services which would most likely be underrated by many but if one wants at scale cheap cold storage, I recommend OVH's cold storage because they cost only 2$ per month/TB storage long term but have only 12$/TB ingress/egress compared to the egregious 100$/TB (or so I have heard) AWS's outage and where you have to play this little dance of shutting down AWS itself or something to not pay it but I genuinely think that OVH has a lot of features
I am not kidding but when I say overwhelmed, I truly meant it so much that I had to take a walk outside to put things into mind, I was looking for partnership opportunities for OVH tho that time but in my mind I have rejected them because they are too big to partner at a small scale In my opinion
OVH has the 2nd most meaningful high content or similar metric (I forgot the website which shared it) after AWS, it had more high traffic websites overall even more so than gcp
Personally I do not like this complexity. Just give me compute and storage and let me handle the rest but I don't really like OVH thaat much (my opinions change overtime too) but please look more into it if you genuinely want european cloud provider, I am interested to know about it, What are the metrics which qualify for the "long shot", I am genuinely curious and wishing to discuss honestly.
Comment by generic92034 7 hours ago
Comment by AndroTux 2 hours ago
But to give you another example (from the article): Try migrating Google Workspace to an EU solution. Actually impossible. I tried it myself, and gave up. The closest you’ll get is Proton, which isn’t EU to begin with and doesn’t even have half of the features Google Workspace offers.
Comment by Imustaskforhelp 54 minutes ago
Proton recently got proton sheets/proton docs
Personally one of the largest issues I have with proton is the lack of extensibility. Like google has app scripts and similar api's but proton's lack of api's have frustrated me so much that I have built an api over scraping/using a puppeteer instance over it but its still in very finnicky state
Comment by antonkochubey 13 hours ago
Comment by tormeh 11 hours ago
Comment by Phlogi 11 hours ago
Comment by okanat 9 hours ago
Most of the time the missing things are homegrown SaaS offerings of big 3 and identity services. You will not find equivalent IAM or BigQuery in indie clouds.
Comment by tormeh 9 hours ago
Comment by Phlogi 11 hours ago
Comment by AndroTux 2 hours ago
Comment by everfrustrated 2 hours ago
Comment by Doches 14 hours ago
Comment by apelapan 12 hours ago
Performance is not great, so you need middleware and batching anyway. As far as I am concerned, it wouldn't be a great loss if Skywise disappeared and just the SFTP with CSV:s remained.
Comment by Zigurd 12 hours ago
Comment by adamcharnock 11 hours ago
We specialise in doing this but on a smaller scale. Eg. 10-100 person companies that have 0-to-a-few DevOps engineers. Included is DevOps time each month to use as you wish, we're on call for SLAs, around 50% reduced cost vs AWS/Google/Azure, etc.
Somewhat differently to most, we deploy onto bare metal. In addition to dropping costs we typically see at least a 2x speed-up overall. Once client just reported a 80% reduction in processing time.
CTOs like us because we're always on-hand via Slack (plus we're the ones getting woken up in the night), and CFOs like us because billing becomes consistent.
Anyway, blatant pitch complete.
[0]: https://lithus.eu/
adam@ above domain
Comment by graemep 6 hours ago
Comment by jacquesm 13 hours ago
History books a hundred years hence will have some choice things to say about how we all stood by and let this happen.
Comment by nxm 12 hours ago
Comment by avh02 3 hours ago
Would have loved to visit the US and see all the things it has to offer, but absolutely not planning to in this climate. I think the US is currently at billions lost in just Canadian tourism?
Comment by DaSHacka 7 hours ago
Comment by crabmusket 13 hours ago
I must be terribly fussy but this genuinely tripped me up while reading. What does this phrasing even mean? Is it an 80% chance of success? This seems like someone has heard the phrase "80/20 rule" and applied it somewhere it makes no sense.
Comment by scirob 7 hours ago
Comment by throw-12-16 6 hours ago
Just ask Ukraine.
Comment by kvuj 4 hours ago
Comment by avh02 3 hours ago
Comment by throw-12-16 3 hours ago
Yes.
Comment by antman 9 hours ago
Why did it have to be Trump to make them take action?
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-france-wikileaks-economy/...
Comment by baq 4 hours ago
Comment by sunshine-o 14 hours ago
1/ First migrate out your "17 years Accenture veteran" executive vice president of digital [0] (who probably sold you MS and Google cloud in the first place)
2/ Then appoint any inside good engineer and ask him to investigate this: "As one of the most prominent and sensitive aerospace corporation, do you think we can setup servers and run our software on it?"
If the answer is no, Airbus might not be fit for the 21th century.
- [0] https://www.airbus.com/en/about-us/our-governance/catherine-...
Comment by BLKNSLVR 13 hours ago
Comment by g-mork 13 hours ago
Comment by sunshine-o 13 hours ago
So computers are actually core to their business. They probably almost invented things like PLM too.
Nothing Airbus does is easy, this is why there are only about 2 companies like that in the world. This is why I do not see why their hosting have to be outsourced...
Comment by PeterStuer 15 hours ago
Comment by insane_dreamer 3 hours ago
Comment by constantcrying 7 hours ago
What is this "Euro Cloud" and what does it have to do with "ERP, manufacturing execution systems, CRM, and product lifecycle management (aircraft designs)"?
For example I am not aware that Microsoft, Amazon or Google offer any PLM services. The companies offering those would be Siemens, Dassault and so on. Is the issue that those PLM providers are themselves running on Microsoft, Amazon or Google Services? But then the issue is with Airbus needing to force their suppliers into changing where there services are delivered from, but AFAIK these PLM providers offer on prem services, so it seems like a relatively trivial issue.
What exactly is the "Euro Cloud" supposed to mean here, what is the actual issue with Airbus switching their PLM to on prem? TO be honest I find it hard to imagine that this isn't already the case. So what is going on here?
Comment by 7492632928 8 hours ago
Comment by jmyeet 11 hours ago
This week it broke that China is pretty far along in duplicating EUV litthography. The US restricts ASML, a Dutch company, from exporting their best machines to China and Korean, Japanese and Taiwanese companies from exporting their chips to China. The second one was a massive mistake. Why? Because it created a marekt for China to produce chips because they had no other choice.
Geopolitically I think this is very similar to the USSR copying the atomic bomb in just 4 years after WW2 where US leaders either thought it was impossible or would take 20+ years.
The US has become unpredictable and unreliable. Ukraine is a big part of this because Europe is waking up to them having to be responsible for their own defense and that ultimately will undermine US power projection through NATO.
Since very early in this administration, probably back when the tariff nonsense began, I believed that Europe would be forced to distance themselves from US tech giants and at some point the EU would require cloud storage to be within EU borders and eventually require European companies to own and run that cloud rather than US companies.
China has their own version of virtually every tech company. I can see the EU moving in this direction for key functions and cloud is likely the first of those.
What's really precarious is the entire US economy is now essentially a bet on US companies owning a global AI future and I honestly don't think it's going to happen, mainly because China won't let it happen. DeepSeek was a shot across the bow for this and only the beginning.
What you really need to remember about the current administration is we're not even 1 year into a 4 year term with everything that's happened and the entire foreign policy is kleptocratic not strategic in nature.
Comment by eurekin 12 hours ago
Comment by andrewstuart 14 hours ago
If it matters so much, run your own computer systems don’t use any cloud.
Comment by tjpnz 14 hours ago
Comment by jasonvorhe 15 hours ago
Comment by jimnotgym 14 hours ago
Comment by ExoticPearTree 10 hours ago
Comment by sunshine-o 14 hours ago
It happened several times in the last decade:
- First politicians raise the alarm about "digital sovereignty"
- Then some create new EU sovereign clouds that are pitched/forced on corporations
- They usually do not work, get consolidated and then the scam is revealed
The biggest reveal was when we discovered and warned one of our client the Orange "Sovereign Cloud" (French telco partially owned by the government !) and built to host European most sensitive worloads was just handed over and run by Huawei [0] [1]. They were not the only one who did something like that.
I don't want to put actors like Hertzner in the same bag as they seem to be honest and really compete to offer a cheaper alternative to hyperscalers.
- [0] https://www.huawei.com/en/huaweitech/publication/winwin/29/o...
- [1] https://www.techmonitor.ai/hardware/cloud/orange-introduces-...
Comment by everfrustrated 2 hours ago
Comment by zrn900 53 minutes ago
Comment by letmetweakit 14 hours ago
Comment by DaSHacka 7 hours ago
Source?
Comment by letmetweakit 5 hours ago
Comment by abc123abc123 14 hours ago
Comment by jasonvorhe 12 hours ago
lol my team has worked with every major cloud provider for a decade, but sure it's all our fault because incompetence.
good luck man.
edit: I never even implied that AWS lock-in something positive. I'm getting paid to move companies from cloud to on-prem because that's true sovereignty.
Comment by nxm 12 hours ago
Comment by sylware 15 hours ago
Comment by FabHK 14 hours ago
Comment by pestaa 14 hours ago
Comment by hulitu 14 hours ago
Not only Airbus. You see, cloud is secure, information is encrypted and only you have access to your data.
Comment by sylware 14 hours ago
Everything else is, I am sorry to say, BS.
Comment by pona-a 14 hours ago
Why would a company without cryptographic expertise modifying an existing algorithm without any particular goal in mind just to be different, produce something more secure than the winning solution in an open cryptographic competition?
> directory names
And file structure too, preferably. Incremental sync could be done with XTS mode.
Comment by sylware 13 hours ago
Are you an AI?
Comment by blincoln 6 hours ago
Usually, non-specialists fiddling with cryptographic algorithms makes them much less secure. Developers who aren't cryptographic mathematicians should generally use a well-respected algorithm, follow current best practices, and treat that component as a magic box that's not to be tampered with.
Comment by jamesnorden 13 hours ago
Sounds like the "I know a guy" kind of thing that shouldn't be done if you really care about security.
>Are you an AI?
Non-sequitur.
Comment by sylware 11 hours ago
Ofc, that must be encrypted on systems which "cannot connect" (and you can go overkill with EM protection with a very good faraday cage).
If you are making such a technical pain for attackers, they will switch to social engineering anyway.
Comment by blincoln 6 hours ago
If someone has an attack that would defeat the cryptographic protection in a particular piece of software, the software is likely doing one or more of the following:
* Not using a modern, well-tested algorithm (e.g. using DES, a hokey custom XOR stream cipher, AES-ECB, etc.).
* Not following general cryptographic best practices (e.g. hardcoded or predictable key/IV/nonce, insecure storage of keys).
* Not following best practices for the specific algorithm (e.g. using AES-GCM, but reusing a key/nonce combination; using AES-CBC without applying an integrity-protection mechanism).
* The software is doing something that doesn't make sense, cryptographically (e.g. using symmetric encryption to encrypt sensitive data, but the data and the keys are necessarily accessible to the same set of users/service accounts, so there's no net change in security).
If such an attack fails because a developer has made changes to the cryptographic algorithm, a motivated attacker is likely just going to look at the code in Ghidra, x64dbg, etc. and figure out how to account for the changes. It's not a strong security control. I've been decrypting content stored using that kind of software for something like 20 years.
The correct approach is to verify that the use of a particular type of cryptography makes sense in the first place, then use a well-tested modern algorithm and follow the current best practices. i.e. using code from years-old forum posts will likely result in an insecure product.
Comment by raverbashing 15 hours ago
Comment by notahacker 14 hours ago
(and I say that as someone that used to sell commercial aviation data that came on CDs...)
Comment by sylware 13 hours ago
It seems there is a misunderstanding over the classification of 'critical' stuff.
We may all have a very different definition.
All I know: the second your are connected to internet, you are cooked.
Comment by notahacker 11 hours ago