Her proposed solution, embodied in the Eurostack Foundation, is not more regulation but an industrial strategy focused on three pillars:
With which she says the regulatory framework is useful as is?
Her proposed solution, embodied in the Eurostack Foundation, is not more regulation but an industrial strategy focused on three pillars:
With which she says the regulatory framework is useful as is?
If a major American cloud provider were to restrict European access or cease operations, the consequences would be immediate and severe. This fragility has created a market opportunity that American hyperscalers are now exploiting.
That is the reason to want change, not to not do it. How is the existing dependence an opportunity 'now' for those Europe is dependent on?
A recent analysis by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute found that of 64 crucial technologies, China leads in 57 and the United States in the remaining seven. Europe leads in none.
Another non sequitur. While a useful analysis, you don't need to 'lead' anything to do things differently than others. Doing it differently may mean you become a leader. You can't sit around waiting to be leading first and then change your practice.
I’ve had Silicon Valley friends tell me that they are planning a trip to China nearly every month this year. Silicon Valley respects and fears companies from only one other country. Game recognizes game, so to speak. Tech founders may begrudge China’s restrictions; and some companies have suffered directly from IP theft. But they also recognize that Chinese companies can move even faster than they do with their teams of motivated workers; and Chinese manufacturers are far ahead of US capabilities on anything involving physical production. Some founders and VCs are impressed with the fact that Chinese AI companies have gotten this far while suffering American tech restrictions, while leading in open-source to boot.
SV techies plan monthly trips to China, as indicator for how China is doing and how US tech sees it
reads like a useful piece on some of the weird narratives I've heard around European digital autonomy and/or sovereignty, wrt the Eurostack initiative
In tech, we have four of these constraints, anti-enshittificatory sources of discipline that make products and services better, pay workers more, and keep executives’ and shareholders' wealth from growing at the expense of customers, suppliers and labor.
1) markets 2) regulation 3) interoperability 4) labor
And I think there's good news there, because if enshittification isn't the result of a new kind of evil person, or the great forces of history bearing down on the moment to turn everything to shit, but rather the result of specific policy choices, then we can reverse those policies, make better ones and emerge from the enshittocene, consigning the enshitternet to the scrapheap of history, a mere transitional state between the old, good internet, and a new, good internet.
enshittocene enshitternet bit too cute I think. Valid point: if it's policy that results in it, we can roll things back. Also w the current Trump chaos-admin there's opportunity as US is dismantling international agreements, making room for other nations / EU regs to disalign too.
Espinoza, J. (2021, November 28). Vestager urges European legislators to push through rules to regulate Big Tech. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/1880d0fb-0651-47ed-a8f4-6cde0f729859
‘How Slovakia Tested 3.6 Million People for COVID-19 in a Single Weekend’. Accessed 26 February 2021. https://www.bi.team/blogs/how-slovakia-tested-3-6-million-people-for-covid-19-in-a-single-weekend/.
Ramamurti, R. (2020, October 27). Global Crowdsourcing Can Help the U.S. Beat the Pandemic. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/10/global-crowdsourcing-can-help-the-u-s-beat-the-pandemic
Romeo, N. (n.d.). What Can America Learn from Europe About Regulating Big Tech? The New Yorker. Retrieved August 19, 2020, from https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/what-can-america-learn-from-europe-about-regulating-big-tech