"The Sovereign Tech Agency started in October 2022 as the Sovereign Tech Fund and is financed by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy. It is a subsidiary of the Federal Agency for Disruptive Innovation, SPRIND GmbH."
(to prevent any misunderstanding: I don't like Mr. Merz, but the Sovereign Tech Fund - founded by the previous government BTW - is definitely a good idea).
https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-...
https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/.github/blob/m...
The loopholes in this "commitment," e.g. allowing Apple to determine unilaterally whether, say, Servo has a well-enough-monitored software supply chain before giving it access to JIT capabilities, give Apple an iron fist over the ability to use this engine in practice in the EU.
But there's also a world where Servo, with funding like this, can achieve these requirements and Apple (begrudgingly) follows the intent of this policy to avoid further regulatory action. And suddenly there's a new browser on the block that can push the boundaries of mobile web capabilities in ways that make the web better overall, and push standards forward as well so that maybe, just maybe, non-EU folks get the benefit of these innovations down the road. One can dream :)
From the linked repository:
> The EU Digital Identity Wallet Reference Implementation helps EU countries and stakeholders to build their own wallets. It consists of open-source code libraries, modular components, and a fully functioning reference application based on the ARF.
The EU forced Apple to open NFC for third party payments, which is great. But all the banks in the Netherlands only have working card payments in Apple and Google Wallet. Including the largest bank (ING), that used to have independent in-app NFC payment on Android (where NFC was always open) but seems to have capitulated and now only offers it via Google Wallet.
At some point, it’s legitimate that innovations are developed for platform that people actually use. It’s good to be practical before being political sometimes.
No, we don't know. You are projecting and again - spreading FUT.
Did you do anything towards implemeting the specs on other platforms? Or are you only very vocal online complaining?
In that repo they clearely stated, that they focus on Android/iOS as it's the most popular platform (contrary to what the IT bubble here may think) and want to reach the most user with the (initial) implementation.
> The EU forced Apple to open NFC for third party payments, which is great. But all the banks in the Netherlands only have working card payments in Apple and Google Wallet. Including the largest bank (ING), that used to have independent in-app NFC payment on Android (where NFC was always open) but seems to have capitulated and now only offers it via Google Wallet.
OK, again - you are projecting Netherlands issues over the UE. Surprisingly - in Poland I can pay with ING bank with NFC. Same in Spain with BBVA app.
Just because something is broken in your corner of the universe doesn't mean it's the global fenomena :)
Also - instead of complaining about the EU - maybe try persuaiding the entities to add support?
Alas - I'm pondering ECI initiative to actually force "Open Android" (ie. withou Google Services being required) as a valid platform because I was fed up with Google imposing more and more overreach. Android is quite OK if it werent for the walled garden from google…
Not in Romania. You have to use Google Wallet. You can't use the ING Pay app anymore since last year.
As for "we have to use google wallet!!!":
https://i.ibb.co/4Z9dMvzR/Screenshot-20251011-184343-Setting...
basically all banking apps for accounts I have (alior, PKO - biggest polish bank, ING Poland and spanish BBVA as well as curve to which you can add whicever card)
https://www.sovereign.tech/tech/servo / https://archive.is/kryIb
There is no browser around servo that is usable and they start with accessibility?
The effort should go first to have it work as an everyday browser and get as much market share as possible. Then think of accessibility and WebView Integration.
This is a unique opportunity to have a browser engine not depending on Google, Microsoft or some of AI companies wanting to get into this field. By watering it down, you will just lose the market to the ladybird which is focused.
1. Accessibility is easier to build in at the start rather than trying to tack it on at the end.
2. Building a browser around an existing webview is fairly easy compared to all the other parts that go into the finished product.
3. Making the webview integration better means more than just a single browser are using it (which would increase the user share that you deemed as important).
Believe, the US government runs biggest such fund viz. https://opentech.fund/ (WireGuard & Tor being some of the past grantees).
That being said, I saw two approaches to this -- negative, when people get some kind of a tool and change things until the tool stops showing warning and positive, where accessibility is another part of UX and has to be designed with positive checks on what actually works.
I sincerely hope that the team behind it is doing it the second way, but I'm not in their heads and don't know whether this text war written as part of government relations to get the moneys or they actually believe it. It's customary to praise Communist party, God allmighty without meaning any of it in some places too.
Oh... could you elaborate?
Wikipedia and their about page give some more info, but they definitely have accessibility experience and the history of delivering stuff.
Ladybird currently has 8 full-time devs [1] and is making impressive progress on delivering a browser from scratch. Wise investment in small, focused, capable teams can go a long way if they're not chasing VC-driven Unicorn status (or in stasis as a Google anti-trust diversion).
That's not challenging your point though: in the face of competing budgets at US tech giants, EUR17Mn still barely registers above noise level. Nevertheless, it's a start. We can only hope it grows and doesn't get shut down by some political lobbying by the aforementioned US behemoths. A modest budget might actually help there - not yet big enough to cause concern to incumbents.
Sure it “isn’t monetized”, but nothing stops you from making non-monetized forks of chromium or Firefox. And nothing stops company from forking Ladybird and monetizing it, either.
Google could do pretty much anything with the platform if it were not for Apple and iOS. And that's a big if because if they align on something it will get to the platform.
Firefox unfortunately seems to be infected by Silicon Valley people that seem to be quite obedient to the status quo.
Ladybird is at least developed by people from all around the world.
They are trying to build digital sovereignty through open source software. Thinking about the commission from the Sovereign Tech Fund as a VC investment is a bit of a misunderstanding. You're right that VC is all but dead, due to AI, so this is exactly why we need some one thinking about the future or our joint digital infrastructure, rather than profit, to invest in projects like Servo.
Which VC is going to be interested in implementing accessibility in this situation? The Sovereign Tech Fund is an organization that values this. It's too long term and uncertain of a project for most entrepreneurs to be involved in too.
> graduate more entrepreneurs
Why would I focus towards being an entrepreneur if the state is just going to step in and steal from me after taking all the risk, after giving up time with my family, after taking on all the stress for the extremely small chance of success and if by amazing odds I manage to hit that success the government will knock at my door and scalp the actual payoff for my risk, talent, and years of time despite contributing nothing other than paying a teacher who isn't an entrepreneur and has never run a business to pretend to teach and graduate me on the matter.
You think that making millions isn't enough, they should simply not be taxed? Just because they've invested a few years on an idea rather than invest on their career at a real company? They still benefited from the free education and social safety net and various funds whilst gambling on their idea, though, right? And that safety net catches the 99 failures for every 1 unicorn born, right?
The post asked a hypothetical question about human motivation. "Why would I..." It came as a question but presumed that the answer was so obvious that the point would be clear without an explicit answer: with such a policy, people won't bother creating the products that lead to unicorns.
Edit:
John Wick got a gift of 7 bullets, EU will do with one ? And it even looks like bullet part in IT world...
