Does someone have the knowledge / expertise to dig into these critics ?
Well, the critics about partnerships and Cloudflare look like low level activism BS, but am interested in what is said under the section "Direct Privacy Abuse" in the article. Are these statements true and do we have to worry about that ?
I can underestand the author's point of view about the uniformizing atmosphere on Linkedin, but I could not quit. I am IT system architect in Paris. It means linkedin is my magic tool to get tons of job opportunities without even searching. Closing my account would be a meaningless and self-harming move...
But by the way I use it only as smart and dynamic resumé / job offer board and never use it as a social network. And I never read at personal publications as they are mainly about corporate spirit BS clichés and pathetic personal development advice.
And I personnaly think that people who spend much time commenting on Linkedin often offer a bad image of themselves : they should work more and self-promote less.
Well in the EU we still have opportunities to fight against other's monopolies and try to impose ours. Which a single small country can't and, at the end, is expected to become vassal of the US or China.
> laugh at the failures
Talking about failures, there are so many in the UK right now that the Brits, rather than laughing, should first focus on their own internal issues, which by the way, are seriously impacting the future of Europe.
>Well in the EU we still have opportunities to fight against other's monopolies and try to impose ours. Which a single small country can't...<
Except for Korea, Japan, Singapore, etc.
>Talking about failures, there are so many in the UK right now<
This is why it's good Britain got out sooner than later. Europe, especially France and Germany, can't handle the idea that their 'European way' of doing things hasn't kept pace with the times. It's easier for these people to attack those trying something new than to accept the possibility of change. At least catch up with SEA before taking cheap shots at the UK.
Korea and Japan, being great, ancient and ultra-modern civilizations are totally depending on the US ruler for their own defence while they have to face a very dangerous neighborhood with N-Korea, China and Russia. And they're not very happy about it...
And Singapore is a dicatorial city state less populated than London or Paris (an less rich). We could have expected a more ambitious model and destiny for a nation which once ruled the world.
> can't handle the idea that their 'European way' of doing things hasn't kept pace with the times.
Good luck with keeping pace with the times with Boris Johnson, Cummings and Patel...
And to get back to the initial topic : what is the plan in UK for a sovereign cloud ? Well I guess the main idea is to give all your data to US companies and abandon any ambition to control your data privacy.
> taking cheap shots at the UK
For a couple of years Britannia has been wandering in the streets with a target painted on her dress and a message: "Hey, don't you dare shoot me, EU assholes"
Well, I think we have no choice in Europe even if it looks weird and too late. Keeping on depending on the US or China for vital infrastructures such as cloud would be a suicide for Europe. US and China cannot be trusted as they only think business and tech in terms of predation and domination. And their tech companies have too many bonds with their intel agencies.
This move should be seen as another evidence of the growing atlantic rift.
Merci de le dire... Parfois cette mentalité collective qui nous caractérise me rend dingue... Le Français passe son temps à cracher sur tout et tout le monde, et surtout sur son propre pays. Donc ça fait du bien de voir des concitoyens qui restent lucides et positifs. Big up.
Europe has to start from somewhere in a market currently dominated by the US and the Chinese... This project may look like a joke for people in the Silicon Valley but everything we do in Europe looks like a joke for Americans.
They laugh at the EU, at our spaceship program, at our industry, at our techs... Whatever we do they say we are old and finished. OK have good times laughing. Meanwhile we go on progressing. Discretly, maybe ridiculously, but we do.
> Europe has to start from somewhere in a market currently dominated by the US and the Chinese...
Yes, and it has to start by copying them. Copying to the letter, like following a recipe, humbly. That's how absolute beginners learn. Not by proclaiming absurd moonshots (by the way, it's "France and Germany", as usual, not the EU) and insisting that we'll build something different, new and innovative and blah blah. Just copy: it will force us to do the things we don't want to do, it will go against our values and culture. Which are probably what's holding us back now.
I think you did not get the purpose of the project and its context.
1. What should we copy ? We already have cloud companies in Europe. The issue is not about a lack of knowledge about cloud technologies. It is a matter of market share. Our companies are not big enough to provide adequate services to european states and sensitive industries.
2. The goal is not to create from scratch a European cloud giant that would be able to challenge Chinese and US powerhouses. It is just way not to rely on them as they cannot be trusted in any manner when it comes to data management and fair competition. As stated many times by Trump and Xi Jiping, EU is a competitor or even worse an enemy. In Europe we share this same bellicose analysis too now. And cloud is a battle among others, but an important one.
True, I don't think we need to copy the technology: that is probably easily available, you just need good engineers and money. The problem is exactly the second you mention: why is it that EU companies don't have the market share that US ones have? Why are our companies not big enough? What prevents entrepreneurs in Europe from creating tech giants such as the US ones? These are the things we need to copy- not the technology.
> The goal is not to create from scratch a European cloud giant ... It is just way not to rely on them
And how do you avoid relying on them? Are you going to force EU companies to choose a EU cloud provider, even when they would have preferred a US one? No, you need to create an offer that is competitive: and once it is, it will be competitive for everyone, not just our companies.
> why is it that EU companies don't have the market share that US ones have? Why are our companies not big enough?
They created the Cloud and we arrived late on this market, so we lag, therefore our companies are not big enough. This FR-GER initiative will secure market shares for european actors, in order they can grow enough to provide a sovereign platform for EU companies which need it.
> Are you going to force EU companies to choose a EU cloud provider, even when they would have preferred a US one?
All defense/sensitive/state owned companies, administration and maybe banking companies will not have the choice as they must comply to EU or national rules about data management. And I guess many european companies competiting with US and Chinese ones in highly competitive markets where bleeding edge techs and secrecy matter are looking for sovereign European solutions.
> They created the Cloud and we arrived late on this market
Same for the web, for the mobile, and for many other sectors. We seem to be always late on the market, why is it so?
> All defense/sensitive/state owned companies, administration and maybe banking companies will not have the choice
Ok, so if I understand it correctly the EU is going to regulate out from some sectors non-EU companies and has to both come up with a legal excuse and to create some acceptable alternative before the regulation comes in force. And if the alternative is mediocre it won't be much of an issue because there will be no choice anyway. But the idea of creating an interoperable standard is good: it could allow a sane competition between companies to provide a basic standardised service. I hope it doesn't resolve in the next embarrassment. It won't solve our problem of constantly lagging in most consumer high tech sectors anyway.
> Same for the web, for the mobile, and for many other sectors. We seem to be always late on the market, why is it so?
1.We lost the WWII. The US won it and took the leadership of the world. At a moment we were rebuilding our continent, they developed very quickly and took a competitive advantage in many sectors. We managed to catch-up in some but not in others. And since the beginning IT has always been an American thing (apart Minitel in France in the 80's). The information era was shaped by IBM, Bell, Intel, Microsoft. Not by Thomson, Siemens or Olivetti.
2.The US are very good at selling stuff and making profit. But as I stated in another post this also has big downsides.
3. Europe is not a country and there are 27 economic policies and strategies which does not help European companies...
4. I think mobile developed first in Europe (Nokia ?)and not in the US but this is detail.
.
> And if the alternative is mediocre it won't be much of an issue because there will be no choice anyway.
This move is not about making good products or value the european savoir-faire.
It is about geopolitics.
> And since the beginning IT has always been an American thing
> apart Minitel in France in the 80's
> Thomson, Siemens or Olivetti.
> I think mobile developed first in Europe (Nokia ?)
Yep. And let's not forget that the www was invented by an Englishman in Geneva.
So how come we seem to be losing all the battles in the end? I agree that there's geopolitical explanations too: another commenter mentioned that the petro-dollar system grant the US with a much lower cost of money- and it's not a small thing. If I understand it correctly, the US acts as the world's bank: prints money that everybody is forced to use and emits in exchange debt titles that everybody wants to buy. That's a huge advantage.
But let's not forget that in the US rules are simpler and companies often have a relative freedom to break them if the public finds it useful; that they can easily downsize and fire underperforming people in case of need; that professionalism and expertise are highly valued; that public administrations are open and welcome new initiatives (imagine in the EU a small private company like SpaceX was at the beginning getting multi-billion contracts from ESA...).
While in France you have judges ordering (shamelessly, in my view) that Google both has to do a certain job and pay for the privilege of doing it.
> So how come we seem to be losing all the battles in the end?
Vast question, and apart the geopolitical reasons, I could not say why we are unable to develop in specific sectors such as IT. I could not speak about whole Europe, but France, my country has serious issues with transforming a tech success into an economic success. If you take this Minitel story for example : the US would have made it a worlwide success 15 years before Internet emerged with hundred of billions of profits. In France it was distributed almost freely to families by the state owned phone company. So it became a booster to the national economy but not much more than that. It never became a standard, never went out of France and never allowed us to become an early IT champion...
We simply have different mindsets. But I think that other European countries are far better than us in this domain.
> While in France you have judges ordering (shamelessly, in my view) that Google both has to do a certain job and pay for the privilege of doing it.
Again this is geopolitics. In France Google is perceived as a dangerous company for our European interest. MOreover like other US tech companies, they cheat to avoid their tax duty in France, which infuriates many people. So all the actions intended against Google are part of a dirty war. These actions are undoubtly unfair. But do not forget Google actively lobbies against our governements at the EU level, try to prevent us from passing laws to regulate our data privacy issues, help the US agencies to spy on us... They are not our friends.
> Same for the web, for the mobile, and for many other sectors. We seem to be always late on the market, why is it so?
From what I have seen it is because of an "ask for permission culture" as a norm. The French show up the most in news stories with "felony interference with a business model" stories.
Say what you will about its role in food but it isn't exactly surprising that innovation doesn't spring forth when new ways of doing things are greeted with such hostility.
> These are the things we need to copy- not the technology.
This is only my own subjective opinion: the worst thing that we could copy from the US is their business mindset. It destroys society, states, fair competition, and at the end the core values of capitalism. Their mindset gave them leadership but now is about to destroy their society.
We have to find our own path.
I agree up to a point. I do think as well that there are the downsides you mentioned to the US business and social culture. But at the same time it produces a clear supremacy in a lot of sectors. We might be able to find a sweet European middle ground, but we need to start with the idea of learning from others, and learning is always a changing process. And I don't think that declaring your pride and love for who you are is a good starting point for any kind of change.
HN comments are just Reddit comments with a thin veneer of objectivity. So mostly just a group think of patting each other on the back, if your opinion conforms.
Europe did a lot of things that seemed unsexy, but habe proven to be good in the long run. That’s why most of the debates in Europe on healthcare, for example, are “the premiums are a tad high”. Compared to the American civil war inducing train wreck that is their healthcare reform debate.
There are tech powerhouses around major universities, like TU Berlin or ETH Zurich. The problem is that the VC market is nowhere near SV.
Also, SV unicorns are all consumer and ad businesses. This is where a homogeneous huge market helps. It’s easier to have network effects when everybody speaks the same language.
For the past four weeks a single person has been banned because he was obsessed with the Linux kernel and dismissed the entire article because of that.
Nice you've discovered that while overlooking the other 3000 comments.
That's called selective attention and confirmation bias, sir.
If you're dismissing something with prejudice (yep, the last banned commentator just didn't have anything valuable to add and he was simply obsessed with the Linux kernel and terminology though the article explicitly states it's about Linux for/on the desktop) it's not even clear why you choose to comment upon in the first place. Dismiss the whole website then! Don't visit it ever ;-) Show your total indifference. :-)
This pesky horrible Web 1.0 website filled with FUD from an unknown Joe doesn't deserve your time. 2 million visitors over 10 years? That's what google.com sees in a few minutes. Cited and quoted all over the web? Still doesn't make it an authority. Almost everything on it is either wrong or exaggerated.
Aren't you smiling and laughing yet? You must be ;-)
I am not this guy who was obsessed by Linux Kernel.
Just check your Disqus dashboard and you will get the list of the users you banned these last days if you cannot remember by yourself ^^
But anyway, why dismissing the whole website which i do not know ?
I am just talking about this lazy article you wrote, full of perceptions but a bit short when it comes to facts... And so outdated...
You wanted to promote yourselves on HN but regarding the amount of negative feedbacks, I hope you got that before thinking about promotion, you should think about working harder and better.
A WFT real story involving burlesque performers, Antifa, Mac Innes (founder of Vice News), a far right 'fight club', cops, counter-terrorism, journalists and cats.
