[HN Gopher] Digital vassals? French Government 'exposes citizens...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Digital vassals? French Government 'exposes citizens' data to US'
        
       Author : ColinWright
       Score  : 178 points
       Date   : 2025-07-20 11:26 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (brusselssignal.eu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (brusselssignal.eu)
        
       | ColinWright wrote:
       | Seen here:
       | 
       | https://www-senat-fr.translate.goog/compte-rendu-commissions...
       | 
       | ================================================================
       | 
       | Quoting the translation:
       | 
       |  _Mr. Dany Wattebled , rapporteur . - Mr. Carniaux, as Director
       | of Public and Legal Affairs, you represent Microsoft France
       | before public decision-makers. Can you guarantee before our
       | committee, under oath, that the data of French citizens entrusted
       | to Microsoft via UGAP will never be transmitted, following an
       | injunction from the American government, without the explicit
       | agreement of the French authorities?_
       | 
       |  _Mr. Anton Carniaux . - No, I cannot guarantee that, but, again,
       | it has never happened before._
       | 
       | ================================================================
       | 
       | Original:
       | 
       |  _M. Dany Wattebled, rapporteur. - Monsieur Carniaux, en tant que
       | directeur des affaires publiques et juridiques, vous representez
       | Microsoft France aupres des decideurs publics. Pouvez-vous
       | garantir devant notre commission, sous serment, que les donnees
       | des citoyens francais confiees a Microsoft via l 'Ugap ne seront
       | jamais transmises, a la suite d'une injonction du gouvernement
       | americain, sans l'accord explicite des autorites francaises ?_
       | 
       |  _M. Anton Carniaux. - Non, je ne peux pas le garantir, mais,
       | encore une fois, cela ne s 'est encore jamais produit._
       | 
       | ================================================================
       | 
       | Thread on Mastodon:
       | 
       | https://toot.cat/@devopscats/114879479938557566
        
         | Disposal8433 wrote:
         | > Mr. Anton Carniaux . - No, I cannot guarantee that
         | 
         | He's smart, he doesn't want to go to jail. But all the
         | governments and current and/or past administrations are guilty
         | of pretended to be retarded since we all knew for the past 30
         | years that Microsoft was not to be trusted.
        
       | Saline9515 wrote:
       | Having worked for the French state and wrestled a few times with
       | its IT services, I can tell you that the reason for choosing
       | Microsoft isn't cost, or "efficiency".
       | 
       | It's that they only know Microsoft, they don't want to learn
       | something else, and if there's a problem, it's Microsoft's fault,
       | no theirs, so they don't have to deal with their own
       | incompetence.
       | 
       | If you want an anecdote, we were working with SAS, a statistical
       | software which required costly licences (more than a million EUR
       | for a few dozens of workers). I suggested to switch to R or
       | Python to the top director, who agreed.
       | 
       | First meeting with the service in charge, the chief opens with
       | "ok, we are asked to change, but the goal here is to show that we
       | tried, and found that it's not possible."
       | 
       | I resigned a few months after, as everything was in the same
       | vein.
        
         | mananaysiempre wrote:
         | The French state is one thing, the Polytechnique is another. My
         | impression is the old-school network administrators at French
         | universities are fiercely protective of their de facto right to
         | make technical decisions regarding equipment and software. So
         | this part surprises me.
        
         | stef25 wrote:
         | This addiction to Microsoft is _everywhere_ and it 's terrible
         | for everyone involved. So many small orgs and NGOs paying
         | through the nose for what can be done for free with Google Docs
         | & Sheets.
        
           | mr_mitm wrote:
           | Relying on yet another American mega corp instead of
           | Microsoft doesn't seem very wise.
        
           | gunalx wrote:
           | ^foss alternatives like onlyoffice, nextcloud...
        
           | sam_lowry_ wrote:
           | NGOs pay little compared to businesses, AFAIR.
        
           | oytis wrote:
           | Using proprietary software that is given away for free is
           | even worse than paying for proprietary software - at least
           | you have a contract in the latter case.
           | 
           | Governments should pay software engineers and system
           | administrators (or infrastructure engineers if you like) to
           | build and run their systems, ideally open sourcing whatever
           | makes sense
        
             | Saline9515 wrote:
             | Google isn't free for non-personal use.
        
         | dataflow wrote:
         | When you say first meeting, is the implication that they were
         | lying about even trying?
        
           | buckle8017 wrote:
           | He outright said their goal was to lie about trying.
        
           | crinkly wrote:
           | This is fairly normal. I've seen it in every corporate job
           | I've had.
           | 
           | Most people seemed to have a retirement clock running and
           | wanted to avoid doing anything they don't give a crap about
           | until then.
           | 
           | Giving a crap about your job is an outlier.
        
             | Yeul wrote:
             | It's funny that capitalism rewards jobs that have meaning-
             | healthcare, education- the least.
        
               | mistrial9 wrote:
               | ok so "funny" but historically, it has been worse. Like
               | the legend of a warrior King in a region towards modern
               | Hungary.. the school teachers would be ordered to stop
               | work when the King and his military advisors rode on the
               | main road for inspection. All the teachers were required
               | to stop and clean the litter by the road as the King
               | passed by. Perhaps the implication is -- if you do not
               | have my military protection, then your school would be
               | burned by invaders? actually not wrong in some places,
               | but can you blame that scene on "capitalism" ? Want to
               | guess the expenses of the armor and servants for the King
               | and their party? probably more coins than were spent on
               | teachers, who were paid in farm produce and exchange
               | services?
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _capitalism rewards jobs that have meaning- healthcare,
               | education- the least_
               | 
               | Doctors and researchers do quite well when they're
               | effective.
        
           | cjbgkagh wrote:
           | Sounds like they were honest about lying, less confusion than
           | lying about lying and helps prevent the unwanted outcome of
           | accidentally succeeding. Not succeeding helps with job
           | security, the problem justifying your job will continue to
           | exist. Since such skills are in demand at all levels of
           | bureaucracy successfully failing to deliver at a lower level
           | will open up opportunities to fail at a higher level.
        
         | moritzwarhier wrote:
         | Sounds like Germany, and it's not just public services.
         | 
         | I used to work part-time in 1st level IT support in a local
         | hospital when I was younger.
         | 
         | The main "theme" of my superior's work subjects there
         | (2009-2016) was the migration from XP to 7. You heard that
         | right.
         | 
         | And apart from the usual Office- and AD-Lock-In, the most
         | problematic workstations of course were always ones with very
         | specialized software. Virtualization and terminal services were
         | in use, but the whole selling point of Windows was mostly put
         | ad absurdum already, because they needed Windows licenses for
         | dedicated machines running e.g. specialized MRT software, but
         | those weren't even part of the main network anyway. They needed
         | arcane syncing procedures anyway and Windows provided no value
         | whatsoever on these devices. Same for the patient monitoring
         | systems on ICU beds. These were using some "embedded" Windows
         | and were rarely working in a stable way at all, nor way they
         | connected to the networks running AD or the CIS (edit: seems
         | it's called HIS in English)
         | 
         | CAD and stuff in the office divisions was similar, but with
         | less integration needs (apart from network printing)
         | 
         | What I'm trying to say is: like in many offices, any slight
         | change made users hostile, updates cost obscene amounts of work
         | and money, and Windows didn't provide much more value compared
         | to SAMBA. That is dated experience, I know.
         | 
         | But MS has not shown to be a trustworthy company in any of my
         | work experience so far.
         | 
         | It was impossible to create working solutions without MS, yes,
         | but the reasons for that never seemed to be grounded in actual
         | value provided by an MS-centric software and networking
         | structure.
         | 
         | It was just the one available commercial solution with enough
         | adoption, and MS has been milking their target markets with
         | these strategies for a very long time.
         | 
         | Making themselves "indispensable", even in machines where their
         | software was used to run a terminal server, basically.
         | 
         | Hell, in my town, 3 years ago, they started to replace subway
         | train LED signals with crappy Windows-CE-based software.
         | 
         | The effects are still noticeable... the whole infrastructure is
         | still 80% worse compared to 10 years ago.
         | 
         | You recognize the useless Windows licenses by the occasional
         | Desktop (seriously, google "cologne KVB windows trashcan"....),
         | 90deg-tilted display, and of course 20% of the signage is out
         | of operation on average now.
        
           | sampl3username wrote:
           | I also had an encounter with government software...
           | 
           | I think the long-lasting solution will be to move to a web-
           | based application system, instead of depending on Desktop
           | applications made for Windows or Linux. Using a web app
           | system, the government only has to concern itself with proper
           | development and maintenance of servers and web apps, and the
           | public workers can use any operating system with a web
           | browser.
        
             | moritzwarhier wrote:
             | I agree with this. When it comes to domain-specific b2b
             | software, pretty much everything that doesn't require
             | native resources or performance inaccessible from the web
             | platform should provide a web-based frontend (even if just
             | as a minimum).
        
               | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
               | And that would be better why exactly? Bloated browsers
               | trying to phone home, even if only to search for updates,
               | or denying access because of overblocking DNS, false
               | software security signatures, whatever? Ja. Klasse! I
               | fucking know about Electron & Tauri. And V8, Node, Bun,
               | TS. Hmmm so geil. Da steht mir der Schwanz steil. Oder
               | auch einfach nur die Haare zu Berge.
               | 
               | Waldmeisterlicher Wackelpudding. Ahoi.
        
             | mananaysiempre wrote:
             | > the public workers can use any operating system with a
             | web browser
             | 
             | With IE6^W Chrome, you mean. Nobody's going to bother
             | testing on anything else.
        
           | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
           | Go SWB, paint it green. Kolle Alaaf!
           | 
           | Just kidding. Triggered some memories.
        
         | arnaudsm wrote:
         | I've lived the exact same scenario in a large public company.
         | Large orgs and misaligned incentives are not exclusive to the
         | public sector.
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | Even when I see "so and so place is switching to X" I always
         | think "uh, do your current Microsoft people ... know how to do
         | that?"
         | 
         | I'm all for training and making the switch, but you gotta get
         | your teams motivated / what they need to do the job. If not IT
         | can resist like few other orgs.
        
         | sofixa wrote:
         | > Having worked for the French state and wrestled a few times
         | with its IT services, I can tell you that the reason for
         | choosing Microsoft isn't cost, or "efficiency
         | 
         | While this is generally not wrong, the French state still uses
         | and creates open source software extensively. Gendermerie
         | Nationale have their own Linux distribution ; Ministry of
         | Foreign Affairs runs Debian for diplomatic personnel. Multiple
         | pieces of public software was developed out in the open
         | (including the government SSO and the COVID tracking app).
         | 
         | So while there is definitely bad, it has been getting
         | progressively better over the past ~10 years.
        
       | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
       | There's simply no option for digital sovereignty other than
       | cultivating a strong domestic software industry. As the source
       | details, much of this exposure is being done with full
       | understanding of the risks and costs.
       | 
       | The article also refers to some report claiming that European
       | solutions are " _wrongly_ judged to be too costly or inefficient
       | ". I'd be interested to read it if anyone has a translation. Even
       | for something as basic as word processing software, every case
       | I've seen so for the alternatives quickly lands on "you have to
       | accept rough edges because that's the cost of data sovereignty" -
       | much easier for a hobbyist or politician to say than an IT
       | director charged with making sure your organization runs well.
        
         | Saline9515 wrote:
         | The French state is working on a google-docs open source
         | alternative: https://docs.numerique.gouv.fr/home/
        
         | ajb wrote:
         | The sad part is, both the EU and the UK (which has the same
         | issue) have the capacity to do this as we have enough software
         | engineers. But most software companies end up being bought out
         | by US ones at some point.
        
         | sunshine-o wrote:
         | > There's simply no option for digital sovereignty other than
         | cultivating a strong domestic software industry.
         | 
         | Yes, but they tried and can't.
         | 
         | Those ideas of domestic computer industry and digital
         | sovereignty have been around since the 60s.
         | 
         | The French had Bull which is now Atos and they failed
         | miserably.
         | 
         | France was very impressive after WW2, they build almost on
         | their own a nuclear weapons, a nuclear energy, aeronautic,
         | military industry and impressive space capabilities.
         | 
         | After that you would expect them to have built a serious
         | competitor to Intel and Microsoft but they didn't. They can't
         | even built basic digital capabilities to support a bureaucracy.
         | 
         | My guess is a very different generation arrived in the 60s-70s
         | in the workplace and in charge: the Silent Generation and the
         | Boomers.
         | 
         | Those generations were not about building anything but more
         | about entitlements and collecting dividends. But of course it
         | takes quite some time for things to get really bad. Information
         | technologies slowly took over many aspects over our societies
         | over the last 50 years and now they find out they do not have
         | sovereignty anymore.
        
       | mananaysiempre wrote:
       | Time[1] and time[2] again, the CJEU has ruled that the US stance
       | of noncitizens having no standing on privacy issues is
       | incompatible with EU law. Time[3] and time[4] again, the European
       | Commission has negotiated a functionally identical agreement
       | codified in executive orders and declared it "adequate" until the
       | court could decide otherwise. Not even the Congress explicitly
       | giving[5] the US government powers to compel (among others) EU
       | subsidiaries of US multinationals, regardless of what EU law
       | says, has changed the equation. Now there's been a presidential
       | election in the US that many in the EU are unhappy about.
       | *Shocked Pikachu*
       | 
       | > [French MP Philippe] Latombe criticised the US-EU Data Privacy
       | Framework (DPF) deal, saying it no longer served EU interests due
       | to the US president's "impulsive" nature.
       | 
       | Am I wrong to say that there's something profoundly rotten in
       | that statement with regards to the rule of law?
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Schrems#Schrems_I
       | 
       | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Schrems#Schrems_II
       | 
       | [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU%E2%80%93US_Privacy_Shield
       | 
       | [4]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU%E2%80%93US_Data_Privacy_Fra...
       | 
       | [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act
        
         | kergonath wrote:
         | > Am I wrong to say that there's something profoundly rotten in
         | that statement with regards to the rule of law?
         | 
         | Why do you think that? The agreement was negotiated under
         | certain conditions, it's not really surprising that a change in
         | circumstances would make it unfit for purpose.
        
         | hulitu wrote:
         | > Am I wrong to say that there's something profoundly rotten in
         | that statement with regards to the rule of law?
         | 
         | No. The laws are applied as long as they serve the rulling
         | elite. See GDPR for examples. Or the copyright law for examples
         | at the other end of the pond.
        
         | sunaookami wrote:
         | All you need to know is that the EU Commission sues their own
         | data protection commissioner because he ruled that the usage of
         | MS365 in the Commission is illegal. So the EU Commission
         | happily works together with Microsoft:
         | https://www.heise.de/en/news/Microsoft-365-EU-Commission-tak...
        
         | YeahThisIsMe wrote:
         | >saying it no longer served EU interests due to the US
         | president's "impulsive" nature.
         | 
         | I'd say that if whether or not an agreement serves the EU's
         | interests entirely depends on who the US president is, then
         | it's not an agreement that serves the EU's interests.
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | If migrating off Microsoft would effectively shut down the
         | government for a period of time they don't really have any
         | choice.
        
       | isodev wrote:
       | I think we need a lot more accessible disclosure on the subject
       | for the public. Even beyond government services, products
       | exposing one to the US should come with a big fat warning.
        
         | hulitu wrote:
         | > products exposing one to the US should come with a big fat
         | warning
         | 
         | You mean products like Microsoft Windows, Apple's iOS and
         | MacOS, Google's Android, Chrome and ChromeOS, Cisco, Fortinet,
         | HP, Dell, AWS, Linux, Meta's Whatsapp Facebook and Instagram
         | and so on and so forth.
        
           | fsflover wrote:
           | > Linux
           | 
           | Citation needed.
        
             | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
             | Systemd's default dns settings, depending on distro
             | defaults.
             | 
             | Yes, it's not the kernel you are probably starting to
             | nitpick about, but it doesn't run anywhere else, so far.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | So it's not Linux but certain privacy-unfriendly distros.
        
       | rdm_blackhole wrote:
       | It's always the same issue.
       | 
       | If you want to move away from <insert US tech giant>, you either
       | need to embrace Linux and open source software which requires the
       | state's employees to learn a new "stack" of applications which
       | means they need to be given appropriate training or you need to
       | have you home grown solutions that are as easy to use as their US
       | counterparts and were developed within the EU by the EU's member
       | countries with the EU's values embedded in them.
       | 
       | The first solution is not going to happen, as Linux is still
       | relatively unknown all things considered and I don't see the
       | French government employees learning how to use this OS and/or
       | the applications running on it by themselves.
       | 
       | Secondly in times of budget cuts like in France currently, the
       | government is not about to rip all the Microsoft products off and
       | replace them with something that would take years to transition
       | to and cost a fortune to implement.
       | 
       | So that leaves the homegrown solution. Unfortunately the work to
       | move off of Microsoft et al should have started 10 years ago but
       | it hasn't. Europe has completely dropped the ball on tech and now
       | it's coming back to bit it in the ass.
       | 
       | The Draghi report from last year was supposed to kick things into
       | gear but we will be lucky to see anything coming through within
       | the next 5 years and by this stage the US tech giants will have
       | entrenched themselves even more in the EU.
       | 
       | I am sorry to say but this is a failure that will resonate for
       | the many decades to come.
        
         | luckylion wrote:
         | I doubt that the average employee could tell Linux and Windows
         | apart if you applied a Window-style skin to Linux.
         | 
         | But at least in Germany, I've seen Windows being written into
         | agreements between state governments and trade unions
         | representing clerks and employees. Good luck changing those
         | without a negotiation running 3 years.
        
           | harvey9 wrote:
           | Lots of people would be disrupted by having to move off MS
           | Office. Not insurmountably so, and MS ironically helps make
           | the case that people can learn new things by often changing
           | their own product interfaces.
        
             | realusername wrote:
             | If you really want to smooth out the transition, there's
             | also companies which would be happy to help you setup and
             | maintain your office environnement on Linux.
        
           | Saline9515 wrote:
           | A cool idea could be to build a replica of Windows, but
           | running Linux and market it to municipalities, NGOs and State
           | entities.
        
       | stef25 wrote:
       | This site has a heavy pro Russian bias, see for example
       | https://brusselssignal.eu/2025/07/europe-still-has-the-power...
       | 
       | Turns out it was founded by an American, who was arrested on
       | suspicion of bias-motivated crimes, second-degree assault and
       | harassment after attacking a reporter in the USA but currently
       | living in Hungary and running some media org there, with ties to
       | the right wing Fidesz party. And he is on paper as being the
       | founded of brusselssignal.eu
       | 
       | His organization received a big loan from an undisclosed source
       | to set up the Brussels organisation and it seems to made up of or
       | advised by a rag tag of European right wing politicians.
       | 
       | The whole thing stinks of Russian meddling in Europe.
       | 
       | Sources https://www.szabadeuropa.hu/a/szazhetvennegy-millios-
       | kolcson...
       | 
       | https://www.companyweb.be/company/0793608171/free-pub/231068...
       | 
       | https://edition.cnn.com/2024/12/28/us/patrick-thomas-egan-ac...
        
         | phtrivier wrote:
         | Good catch. The OP article is mostly transcript from a Senate
         | hearing, so the bias is limited.
        
         | alt187 wrote:
         | Yeah, anyone who wants Europe to move away from Our Holy
         | American Benefactors, are, uh, uhhh, yeah, russian plants!
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | One of these days Europeans will realize they are also part
           | of the American empire just in a bit of a dominion status. If
           | you host an American military installation, you are part of
           | the empire with a fig leaf of domestic policy control that
           | keep the bulk of the populace from realizing this. Take a
           | look at a map of American military installations. The sun
           | never sets on this latest roman empire.
        
             | liotier wrote:
             | It took Trump for the Europeans to realize that De Gaulle
             | was right.
             | 
             | The consequences of the European Union realizing the were
             | the USA's protectorate are not going to please the USA
             | though... Buy ITAR-free, buy European !
        
       | hollowonepl wrote:
       | I many time heard here in Europe not to trust Chinese appliances
       | as these devices do listen to us... is #USA any different?
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | I think given the NSA's capacity they'll find a way to listen
         | to us regardless which devices we use. But we're certainly
         | going out of our way to make it easy for them.
        
       | afarah1 wrote:
       | I don't see enough talk about reducing the amount of data
       | collected in the first place. Even if it's kept within one
       | jurisdiction, it can still be the target of a breach by a local
       | criminal, a foreign spy, or a new government agency... Cameras on
       | every street, cellular antenas on every car, biometrics for
       | everything... It may vary from country to country, but an
       | expansion on citizen data collection (in one area or another)
       | seems commonplace across most governments, and usually with zero
       | opposition in "the real world". And unlike products or platforms
       | that you can chose to not use, there's hardly any escape from
       | those.
        
       | motohagiography wrote:
       | these seem like solved problems. in canada, many govt depts have
       | procurement rules that state all data must be hosted nationally
       | by a custodian subject to national or even provincial law, and
       | this has been standard for decades. the firm I work for also
       | doesn't use google or microsoft clouds for similar reasons.
       | 
       | the deeper problem is governments are not technology builders and
       | cannot produce tech products because they have no unique ability
       | to deliver anything anyone subject to them actually wants.
        
       | phtrivier wrote:
       | It's interesting that there at least starts to be two opposing
       | camp in the executive (some people in French government start to
       | push for more sovereignty, some EU governments too, some MEPs,
       | etc...)
       | 
       | Of course the rest of the administrations are not there yet,
       | there are contracts to abide to, habits, etc... But there is the
       | start of a general recognition that overdependence on the US is a
       | liability at some level.
       | 
       | Also, it would incredibly more feasible to move IT infrastructure
       | back and have some reign on data, then it would be to recover
       | from our overdependence on China in terms of... Well, in terms of
       | everything physical.
       | 
       | Which means that the first milestone would be to host pour data
       | on "sovereign" data centers... Using East-Asian made hardware.
       | 
       | One thing at a time, I guess ?
        
         | alephnerd wrote:
         | > Using East-Asian made hardware.
         | 
         | Most DCs are already using "Asian made" hardware such as Korean
         | memory chips, Taiwanese power supplies and fabricated chips,
         | and Japanese designed storage.
         | 
         | Unless you mean Chinese-made hardware, which would put much of
         | Europe in the exact same position, with the added downside of
         | supporting a nation that is cooperating with Russia, and is
         | strongly in support of a Russian victory [0] in Ukraine. China
         | has also begun leveraging export controls on tech transfers and
         | outbound FDI as well, so dependency on an external nation would
         | remain.
         | 
         | The reality is there is no choice other than America+ or
         | Chinese made hardware for EU member states, and as long as
         | Russia continues to leverage Chinese dual-use technology, it
         | will be a no-go. And the European (in reality German+Dutch)
         | ecosystem has largely been stagnant since the 2000s, and
         | critical technology like EUV is nominally owned by EU companies
         | but developed and manufactured by autonomous JVs within the US.
         | 
         | Either the EU supports Ukraine, in which case there is no
         | choice but to deal with America+ or the EU leverages China, in
         | which case support for Ukraine would have to stop.
         | 
         | [0] -
         | https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3316875/ch...
        
       | guiriduro wrote:
       | Honestly how hard can it be given Microsoft size (and AWS, and
       | Google's) to mandate the intervention of a EU corporate entity to
       | manage their IP in the region, full source code, EU cloud assets,
       | encryption keys, EU-only support access, collect their royalties
       | etc., but essentially act as a privacy buffer wholly unanswerable
       | to any US head office or any obligations US law holds the company
       | to wrt any EU person, its just a black hole that grants them the
       | right to earn money and hold a large market share in the EU. The
       | Chinese aren't afraid to do it.
        
         | alephnerd wrote:
         | > Honestly how hard can it be given Microsoft size (and AWS,
         | and Google's) to mandate the intervention of a EU corporate
         | entity to manage
         | 
         | Very difficult.
         | 
         | Countries like Ireland, Poland, Czechia, Romania, and Bulgaria
         | are heavily dependent on American FDI in their tech industry,
         | and the European Council has final say and requires unanimity.
         | A rule such as the one you mentioned would smother VC/PE in
         | much of the EU, as European funds like Index Ventures and
         | Munich Re Ventures are heavily dependent on the US to raise
         | capital and build dealflow.
         | 
         | Major European employers like Volkswagen AG, Siemens AG, NXP,
         | Phillips, Infineon, and others would also face severe
         | retaliation as a result.
         | 
         | It would also set a precedent that would make an alternative
         | like China extremely hesitant to invest, as the Chinese
         | government heavily utilizes export controls on tech transfers.
         | For example, BYD investment in Hungary is largely CDK with the
         | core high value components like Batteries being manufactured in
         | China. Biren, Huawei, and SMIC would face similar export
         | controls.
        
           | guiriduro wrote:
           | Major Cloud providers would still need to invest eu-customer
           | money in providing eu IT services, this is more a legal,
           | security and privacy isolation for big tech players in order
           | to maintain their share, extract royalties etc.
           | 
           | Startups that are not in a large marketshare situation
           | wouldn't trigger the need for intermediary/isolation so the
           | effect on FDI would be limited, and anyway, the tides are
           | turning on US capital in general.
           | 
           | Retaliation: I'm not sure the US fiscal and legal overreach
           | isn't already in place, e.g. VW dieselgate, export controls
           | etc. The US looks after its interests (fair enough), but its
           | time the EU levelled the field to protect its citizens, a
           | small loss of regional sovereignty for those companies in
           | exchange for the EU revenue they continue to make.
        
             | alephnerd wrote:
             | > Major Cloud providers would still need to invest eu-
             | customer money in providing eu IT services, this is more a
             | legal, security and privacy isolation for big tech players
             | in order to maintain their share, extract royalties etc.
             | 
             | That's already done today with little-to-no acrimony, and
             | none of the regulations you mentioned. Where do you think
             | much of that FDI in Ireland, Poland, Czechia, Romania, and
             | Bulgaria is coming from?
             | 
             | > Startups that are not in a large marketshare situation
             | wouldn't trigger the need for intermediary/isolation so the
             | effect on FDI would be limited, and anyway, the tides are
             | turning on US capital in general
             | 
             | It's not just startups. American BigTech GCCs represent the
             | bulk of tech related FDI in Czechia, Romania, Poland, and
             | Bulgaria, and Ireland's US-friendly business law has lead
             | to a severe dependency on the US for capital [1].
             | 
             | > the tides are turning on US capital in general.
             | 
             | American Capital markets continue to remain larger in size
             | than the entire EU's combined [0]. And China's is roughly
             | in size to the entire EU. An the reality is, European
             | capital markets are nowhere near as unified as either the
             | US or China's.
             | 
             | > its time the EU levelled the field to protect its
             | citizens, a small loss of regional sovereignty for those
             | companies in exchange for the EU revenue they continue to
             | make
             | 
             | But how?
             | 
             | The EU isn't significantly unified, and depends on
             | unanimity within the European Council. As I mentioned
             | before, Ireland, Czechia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Poland
             | would be a significant veto to any shift against the US.
             | 
             | Furthermore, French and German domestic giants continue to
             | compete against each other in every industry, which has
             | lead to cooperation failures such as the FCAS snafu
             | recently [2].
             | 
             | There is no "EU grand strategy", as major member states
             | like Germany, France, and others push back or compete with
             | each other internally.
             | 
             | And given the fact that the Chinese players are
             | cannibalizing European competitors within China, major
             | European companies like Volkswagen and Siemens are now
             | heavily dependent on the US as an alternative market.
             | 
             | [0] - https://www.sifma.org/wp-
             | content/uploads/2023/07/2024-SIFMA-...
             | 
             | [1] - https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-fd
             | i/forei...
             | 
             | [2] - https://on.ft.com/4n77YpQ
        
         | dlgeek wrote:
         | AWS is doing that: https://www.aboutamazon.eu/news/aws/built-
         | operated-controlle...
        
       | crop_rotation wrote:
       | The EU majorly screwed up by not focusing on a homegrown software
       | ecosystem. The Chinese, due to either luck or competence or both,
       | have a parallel big tech ecosystem compared to America and that
       | is a huge advantage.
        
       | CalRobert wrote:
       | Europe is in love with azure too bizarrely.
        
         | sofixa wrote:
         | Anyone using Azure is bizarre.
         | 
         | Just search for Azure on wiz.io's blog, the amount of terrible
         | yet easy to exploit security vulnerabilities, often with shit
         | responses from Microsoft, is terrifying. It clearly
         | demonstrates nobody with power within the Azure org cares about
         | security. How can _anyone_ trust them with anything remotely
         | critical? Let alone the terrible UX and absurdly eventual
         | consistency.
         | 
         | Yeah, yeah, I know, the people who know and understand this
         | aren't the ones getting wined and dined to buy it. But still..
        
       | hunglee2 wrote:
       | EU obviously needs a Great Firewall - this would force foreign
       | big tech to host data within the EU and subject these companies
       | to ironclad EU legal jurisdiction. Naturally, some companies will
       | not comply and withdraw services, clearing the way for domestic
       | EU operators to emerge. This may seem like an unpalatable choice
       | but it really is the only way back toward digital sovereignty -
       | right now, the EU has been in 'trust me bro' situation with US
       | big tech - a huge and accumulative risk
        
       | bpavuk wrote:
       | wait, do they (at least attempt to) spearhead it with Mistral and
       | La Suite? La Suite works good...
       | 
       |  _regard francais perplexe_
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-20 23:00 UTC)