295 pointsby sblank3 hours ago50 comments
  • owenthejumper2 hours ago
    In a normal world, this would be treason by an illegal immigrant to the US. In today's world it's a blip in news. Sad state of affairs :(

    Europe will absolutely build alternatives. They'll bicker for some time, but in the end, they build. To Americans it looks like they don't but they do. Quality of life, life expectancy, and many factors have outpaced US in the last few years. The tech industry in the US is still important, but the importance will start waning soon.

    • dnautics2 hours ago
      I'm pro Ukraine but treason has a specific definition in the us Constitution, so until Congress declares Russia an "enemy" and not just an "adversary" it's not treason. Would be very strange to have ISS missions and rideshare agreements with an "enemy".
      • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
        I guess they're not trying too hard to find proof that Russia is supplying Iran with intelligence and Shahed drones.
        • ameliusan hour ago
          > I guess they're not trying too hard to find proof that Russia is supplying Iran with intelligence and Shahed drones.

          You mean Iran supplying Russia with drones.

          • thinkcontextan hour ago
            Iran has also supplied ballistic missiles to Russia. Ukraine attacked a Caspian ship of Iran's that was allegedly carrying arms over the summer.

            Assistance has been mutual, though lately the flow has been more from Russia to Iran. Drone improvements, targeting intelligence and missile tactics to avoid Patriot interception.

          • epistasisan hour ago
            Lately the drones have been flowing the other direction, from Russian factories to Iran.
      • epistasisan hour ago
        If he's doing this at an urging of an enemy of the US, Putin, how could that not be treason?

        He put American lives in direct risk in Kyiv, at the bidding of a foreign enemy, while having control of massive amount of crucial infrastructure.

        I'm not sure how you can see that as anything except treason. Any plebe employee doing it would be up for treason, especially an employee that had been in direct contact with Putin or other foreign agents, like Musk has been.

        • ben_wan hour ago
          Common use != legal use. We can regard it as treason without the law doing so, because we can regard Putin as an enemy of the US without the law doing so.

          That said, I'm not saying what position the law supports. I never studied law, let alone American law.

          • nradova minute ago
            US federal law is quite clear on this point: for better or worse, Russia isn't legally classified as an "enemy" and thus it would be impossible to convict anyone of treason for aiding them. (I'm not claiming that's a good state of affairs, just explaining the legal situation.)
    • boricj2 hours ago
      > In a normal world, this would be treason by an illegal immigrant to the US.

      Not a lawyer, but wouldn't an illegal immigrant owe no allegiance to breach and therefore couldn't commit treason?

      • ummonkan hour ago
        Not after naturalization
        • cowlevelan hour ago
          Naturalized immigrants are legal by definition
        • vrganjan hour ago
          If they were illegal immigrants, isn't naturalization void?
          • overfeed23 minutes ago
            In a just world, Musk would get the Ilhan Omar treatment - and he actually broke US immigration law, a breach for which thousands of people are being deported by the current administration.
          • ben_wan hour ago
            I will laugh a great deal if the Democrats regain power, apply this logic to Musk, and successfully remove his American citizenship.

            Same for Melania, but doing it to Musk would be much funnier.

    • an0malous2 hours ago
      We’re also fighting a war for another country and the president’s son in law is brokering deals with foreign nations for personal gain. I don’t think treason is being prosecuted anymore.
      • vconnoran hour ago
        It is for you and I, not for those in power.
    • HarHarVeryFunnyan hour ago
      There is already the European Eutelsat alternative to Starlink, with 600 satellites currently deployed (vs Starlink's 6000). They provide satellite internet, and video, both for consumer, business and military/government use.

      Apparently Ukraine does use already use Eutelsat in addition to Starlink, but it's utility is limited due to number of satellites and bandwidth, as well as the current weight of terminals (presumably an issue for weapons-borne receivers).

      • Sayrusan hour ago
        Starlink has over 10000 satellites. The goal of Eutelsat is 1000 by 2030. Starlink launched 3000 satellites in 2025 alone. Whether one satellite from Eutelsat provide the same service as one from Starlink, I don't know but it would be relevant.

        I wish Eutelsat success, but the scale of funding is completely different.

        • verzali2 minutes ago
          Getting hung up on numbers isn't really correct. Much more goes into it - altitudes, satellite capabilities, target customers, etc. Large numbers is one approach but it is not the only one.
        • Peanuts99an hour ago
          Ukraine and even Europe don't need global coverage though. The Russian system that they're testing at the moment is geostationary satellites over Ukraine.
          • paleotrope33 minutes ago
            Latency to geo isn't going to work for man controlled drones though
    • PrimeOS32an hour ago
      It's not treason if it was a White House decision. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/order-limit-starshield-...
    • brandonagr2an hour ago
      Europe would have to not only build the satellites, but launch them, which rocket program do you think exists in Europe that could do that? The pace of Ariane launches could not accelerate quickly enough
      • ben_w43 minutes ago
        Ariane can't, but then again neither could any non-SpaceX American launch provider.

        What's the total funding needed to get a Falcon 9 equivalent, given it's demonstrably possible? Likely about the same as SpaceX actually spent in time and money?

    • themgtan hour ago
      > They'll bicker for some time, but in the end, they build. To Americans it looks like they don't but they do

        There was ease in Casey's manner as he stepped into his place;
        There was pride in Casey's bearing and a smile lit Casey's face.
        And when, responding to the cheers, he lightly doffed his hat,
        No stranger in the crowd could doubt 'twas Casey at the bat.
      
        The sneer is gone from Casey's lip, his teeth are clenched in hate,
        He pounds with cruel violence his bat upon the plate;
        And now the pitcher holds the ball, and now he lets it go,
        And now the air is shattered by the force of Casey's blow.
      
        Oh, somewhere in this favoured land the sun is shining bright,
        The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light;
        And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout...
    • an hour ago
      undefined
    • aaron6952 hours ago
      [dead]
    • orochimaaru2 hours ago
      [flagged]
      • mlylean hour ago
        This is false / misleading. Ukraine's use of Starshield runs on normal Starlink infrastructure and is administered by SpaceX. From the WSJ: https://archive.is/1pzLc

        > What is Starshield?

        > Starshield is SpaceX’s more secure satellite service for governments. It has two variants: a custom-built satellite network SpaceX launched for the Pentagon; and a lower-tier, military-grade service that connects to commercial Starlink satellites. The more basic service offers encryption features, and allows the equipment to travel at faster speeds than those on a commercial Starlink account.

        > What service does Ukraine use?

        > Ukraine is using the more basic Starshield service, which uses Starlink’s equipment. Ukraine’s weapons—attack drones, interceptors and uncrewed boats—need to travel at high speeds to intercept Russian Shahed-type drones, bomb the Russian army’s logistics and stall Russia’s invasion force. Many of those drone missions are now failing because of the speed limit imposed by SpaceX, according to the Ukrainian military.

      • squidbeak2 hours ago
        • brandonagr2an hour ago
          From anonymous source...
          • vrganjan hour ago
            Yes, that is how reporting works. You have anonymous sources that you verify, but don't out, because they would suffer reprisals otherwise.

            Journalism 101, c'mon.

      • so-gala-massey2 hours ago
        I don’t get your comment. It is either willfully ignorant, naive, or intentionally misleading. The comment has to be one of those three given the actual facts.
        • amanaplanacanalan hour ago
          I believe they were repeating what Musk originally claimed. Of course believing anything that Musk says increasing seems naive.
      • HarHarVeryFunnyan hour ago
        FWIW, the WSJ is reporting that Trump called Musk to ask him to lift restrictions on "a military grade version of Starlink", which is rather incredible - an admission by the commander-in-chief that a civilian is controlling US military infrastructure.

        https://www.wsj.com/world/trump-called-musk-and-asked-him-to...

        Of course from Europe/Ukraine's POV, it doesn't make much difference whether it was Musk or Trump/US military that did it. What matters is that a former ally and NATO partner can not be trusted, and eliminating American technological and defense dependence is therefore critical for regional security.

      • actionfromafar2 hours ago
        These days, the walls between billionaires, Fox hosts and the Military seem paper thin, if there are any.
        • mike_bob2 hours ago
          The USA became a full-fledged oligarchy right around the time conservatives pushed "Citizens United" on us. We were already headed that way for a while, but it really sealed the deal.
      • Damogran62 hours ago
        I think you're missing something really simple: IF you can touch the hardware, you own it. It doesn't matter the hostname on the satellite, Elon is culpable.
        • orochimaaru2 hours ago
          That’s not how it works. It’s like saying Lockheed operates the F35 but it doesn’t. Starshield provides the tech. US military has operational control - and you will be committing a crime if you so do anything without permission.
          • rocmcd2 hours ago
            Then how could Musk limit Starshield capabilities if the US military has control?
          • verdverm2 hours ago
            Except that the owner of starshield has the presidents ear and favor, he asked the commander in chief of the military to change things. There is control in theory and control in practice, not always the same thing.
            • Kevin_Flynnan hour ago
              Why go through the headache and paperwork and expense of official channels if a phone call gets it done ?

              It's going to be the same outcome. When the military wants something done, in the name of an "ongoing conflict" aka war, private corporations obey, because the military is writing the checks.

              WSJ gins everyone up and makes it all sound like its some kind of scandal.

              Theres probably 1,000 videos on youtube about companies helping government in times of war.

              WSJ has subscriptions to sell.

              They told us to wear masks for COVID too. :|

              "Hey Elon, can you jiggle the telco line quality to make 'em nervous, we're having meetings soon."

              "No problem Donald. I got you."

              Thats my theory, based on words in articles n stuff.

              • verdverman hour ago
                I agree that competent military people understand the benefits to aiding and working with Ukraine, that Ukraine has been helping the US and ME with their anti-drone expertise, and that the broken media systems loves to write stories "CEO said..."

                Unfortunately, there are some pretty big sociopaths at the top (Musk, Hegseth, Vance, Trump) that have it out for Ukraine and want to do business with Russia.

                • Kevin_Flynnan hour ago
                  Well, Trump kinda is the military, legally speaking.

                  And he's been managing media psyops his entire career.

                  Some people see the used car salesman's tactics. Some don't.

                  Either way, the back office most likely did the math.

                  No car salesman is an island.

                  "Flood the zone. Create confusion in all parties."

                  "See who breaks and what matters."

                  "Negotiate."

                  Thats what seems to make sense here.

                  Sometimes its random, sometimes its not.

        • verdverm2 hours ago
          also, if you contribute $100Ms to the president you can do just about anything

          we are to accept that nepotism is what makes america great again

    • wg02 hours ago
      [flagged]
      • verdverm2 hours ago
        This propaganda does not work on HN

        Especially under Trump (but even before) Europe has contributed more to Ukraine

        The war is about Putin's desire for Russian Empire and has nothing to do with NATO, that's just what they say when they speak in English. Listen to what they say in Russian. Listen to the revisionist history.

        Listen to Timothy Miller.

        • wg0an hour ago
          Are you saying that the Eastward expansion of NATO or inclusion of Ukraine into NATO were none of the issues when the current war broke out?
          • verdverm42 minutes ago
            Countries are free to join whatever alliance they want

            If Russia is scared or insecure, that's on them, not a valid reason to murder others, NATO is a defensive pact

            Listen to what Putin says in Russian, the war is about Making Russia Great Again, a conquest of empire. He miscalculated and Russia is in the worst place it has been since the fall of the USSR. Their future does not look bright either.

        • nradovan hour ago
          That is misinformation. Since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 (and again in 2022), Europe has paid far more to Russia for fossil fuels than they ever contributed to Ukraine. I think that both the USA and Europe should do more to support Ukraine but so far contributions from both parties have been the bare minimum to keep Ukraine from being defeated. Not enough to enable them to actually win.

          Let's be clear what's really going on here. Russia has a GDP about the same as Italy. The EU and NATO countries could contribute far more to Ukraine but they choose not to. Instead it's business as usual. The welfare states continue uninterrupted and they haven't asked their citizens to sacrifice anything. They continue buying Russian fuel instead of asking people to put on a sweater.

          • verdverman hour ago
            It's a complex system that has a history and situation when war broke out

            This does not change that the EU has contributed more to Ukraine than the US overall, which is separate from the fossil fuels which the EU has made good progress on, and separate from the high end systems Ukraine needs most right now. The US overcommitted to global security, Trump took us into another forever war, and the world is reorganizing. I generally agree the the US could do a lot more, but that's not happening and other countries need to take care of themselves instead of the America will protect everyone. That is not the reality we live in any more.

            • nradovan hour ago
              Lol. It's always easy to blame cowardice and inaction on complexity and history. But the fact remains that EU and NATO countries actually increased their fossil fuel imports from Russia after they invaded Ukraine in 2014. Tell me all about "progress".
    • mrits2 hours ago
      [flagged]
      • deancan hour ago
        Another mindless comment grouping all Europeans into the same bucket. Europe has incredibly poor countries where developers are paid pitance (within Europe) and then developed countries paying high salaries (relative to the cost of living).

        If you are a software engineer doing a relatively good job, it really doesn't matter which country you live in Europe - you will have a comfortable life. That said, of course if you take a Romanian sweng salary and try and live in Switzerland off that - you might live a little less comfortably. Similarly if you take a Swiss sweng salary and live in Romania - you will live extremely comfortably.

      • wg02 hours ago
        Are Chinese paying competitive wages that there is chip fabrication, car manufacturing, AI models and what not?

        Its just that West has been a unified block and no other reason.

        Put harsh sanctions on US products and services, few difficult years later there would be a copy of everything US but made in Europe.

        But that's a stupid thing to do. West as unified block is the best outcome for everyone but fascist won't understand that.

        • timacles2 hours ago
          Oh they understand it. They just can’t pass up the opportunity to make massive amounts of money and increase their power by fragmenting western society
        • mrits19 minutes ago
          You don’t even have your own website to post this rant on.
      • SecretDreams2 hours ago
        How much are you being paid to innovate these comments?
      • amanaplanacanal2 hours ago
        You seem to be implying that innovation never happens in Europe? Is that correct?
        • nradov2 hours ago
          No one claimed that innovation never happens in Europe. But there are reasons why Europe lags the USA in the pace of innovation, and is falling even further behind. Low wages for technologists is one reason. Other reasons include immature capital markets, excessive regulation (on things that don't even protect consumers or the environment), punitive bankruptcy laws, weak tertiary education systems, and risk-averse cultures. Some of those things they could fix very quickly if they wanted to adopt a growth agenda and stop being poor.
          • vrganjan hour ago
            "Stop being poor" is laughable, as somebody who's walked the streets of the Tenderloin before.

            Sure, there's poverty in Europe, and sure the GDP per capita is lower. But poverty and absolute precarity like it exists in every major US city is unheard of here.

            Ironically, part of the culprit for creating these absolutely destitute inhumane conditions is said "growth agenda".

            • mrits12 minutes ago
              This thought process is why nobody in the US considered Europe a threat to our tech sector. You still don’t get it.
              • vrganj3 minutes ago
                Maybe it is people in the US that still don't get it? What you are considering is not relevant to the reality on the ground.

                The Empire is falling apart, whether you acknowledge it or not.

      • ErroneousBosh2 hours ago
        Lol. You think that wages in the US are competitive?
      • m00dy2 hours ago
        It's more about mindset and they're doomed to fail.
    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
    • aristofunan hour ago
      It was the case maybe 50 years ago, but there are no systemic factors that support strong building/innovation/ entrepreneurial processes anymore. Maybe with some occasional exceptions.

      Have you seen what crap cars even german manufacturers produce lately?

      • Peanuts99an hour ago
        German car quality is a mark of how optimised manufacturers have got for building cars that work within 2 terms of 4 year finance plans.

        You'd be foolish to think it correlates to any sense of innovation or entrepreneurialism.

      • gedyan hour ago
        This is the case throughout the West, including the US. A generation ago the powers at be decided they would invest in China for this.
    • satvikpendeman hour ago
      This comment reminded me yet again to always wait for HN comments to settle down after several hours because the first sentence is immediately wrong in multiple ways as people have pointed out such that I'm not sure why one would bother to believe the rest, even though I do have thoughts on how exactly Europe would build, or not.
    • nakedrobot2an hour ago
      All humans with > $100M net worth need to have 99.5% of their wealth forcibly seized.
      • vconnoran hour ago
        By whom? The people with > $100M net worth in Congress and their friends?

        At which point do we realise politicians are not on our side?

        • ben_w41 minutes ago
          Even though I think the comment you replied to is wildly over-simplifying how things work:

          > By whom? The people with > $100M net worth in Congress and their friends?

          That is how taxes have historically worked, so why object this time?

          > At which point do we realise politicians are not on our side?

          That's the argument for democracy. I would like democracy to be better than it is, but fundamentally, this is what it's for: getting the politicians on our side.

        • MentalM36 minutes ago
          > By whom?

          By the relatively small group of armed leftist activists ready to use violence until their goal would be achieved.

        • 010ED67913an hour ago
          [dead]
  • jschveibinz9 minutes ago
    Follow the money: European wealth is concentrated in a smaller number of centralized institutions that are more conservative investors compared to U.S.

    Pension funds: - U.S. has over 5,000 independent municipal, state, and corporate pension systems that invest aggressively. - EU pension capital is in national funds.

    University Endowments: - U.S. has over 800 active endowments (with 130+ exceeding $1 billion) - EU universities are state funded, with little or no endowment funds

    Corporate Financing: - U.S. businesses get > 70% of funding from VC, PE, mutual funds - EU companies favor banks

    Family Offices: - U.S. system has created over 10,000 single-family offices that invest aggressively - EU has ~2,000

    State investment: - U.S. moves .16% of GDP into small business with no equity ownership -- free market VC takes equity - EU moves < .08% of GDP into small business with full equity ownership.

    • nradov6 minutes ago
      Exactly. Deep and sophisticated capital markets are the #1 advantage that US tech companies have over their EU competitors. The difference in cost of capital is huge, especially for something as capital intensive as SpaceX.
  • tumdum_2 hours ago
    ICEYE and Nokia are already working on a replacement for starlink: https://www.iceye.com/newsroom/press-releases/iceye-and-noki...

    Isar is working hard on commercial launch capabilities: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/sep/06/german-star...

    • yreg25 minutes ago
      Until they can match Falcon 9 launch costs (the internal ones, not what SpaceX sells it for) it will be very difficult to compete with Starlink.
      • mpweiher9 minutes ago
        They don't have to "compete" with Starlink. They just have to provide similar capabilities.

        And Ariane used to be the dominant commercial launch vehicle, beating the US alternatives by a mile.

      • tumdum_6 minutes ago
        Cost is not the only factor when we are talking about solution for the army.
      • postepowanieadm13 minutes ago
        If they make it Europe only maybe they can do with less satellites?
  • delichon2 hours ago

      Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS. Starlink is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX. Usage of Starlink is limited to civilian or defensive activities and cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.
    
    https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2110445577184133456
    • Neywiny2 hours ago
      What's great about this is the are 2 ways to read this:

      1. Ukraine is in an offensive position

      2. Ukraine is in a defensive position and thus it was indeed Musk

      To me these are both very dumb stances. Lose lose statement

      • mrec2 hours ago
        I read it as being more specific than one overarching "position". Long-range strike drones are arguably "offensive action" even in a clearly defensive war, interceptor drones are clearly "defensive action". Midrange strike against targets in occupied Ukrainian territory are a bit of a grey area.

        Of course, Starlink/Starshield is already unavailable for long-range strike due to geofencing, and the speed limit was clobbering interceptors right when they needed that speed to cope with the new jet-powered Gerans, so it's still a daft stance overall.

        • raszan hour ago
          >Midrange strike against targets in occupied Ukrainian territory are a bit of a grey area.

          Nothing grey about destroying invading army on your own territory.

          >speed limit was clobbering interceptors

          That version never passed the smell test, interceptors dont use Starlink.

          • ibejoeb16 minutes ago
            Ukraine's position has been that starlink is used exclusively for drone defense, i.e., interceptors. That is sensible because that's within the contracted terms. However, there is intentional obfuscation of starlink and starshield in all of this. Ukraine also claims that it doesn't use star-anything for offensive drone attacks, which is kind of unbelievable. The contention started when the White House told Ukraine that refineries were off limits, and then Ukraine struck refineries anyway. It seems clear to me that 1) they are using the technology, however it is branded, to reach and possibly cross the border, and 2) this was a signal to abide by the temporary restrictions, as the tri-lateral talks are being negotiated.
    • dyslexitan hour ago
      Wall Street Journal has reported this was ordered by Musk directly:

      https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-starlink-elon-musk-trump-d...

      Not sure why so many people here are defending him as though his word is authoritative. The guy's as big a liar as Donald Trump.

    • darksaintsan hour ago
      Hilarious that you believe words that come out of Musk’s mouth. How embarrassing.
      • christophilusan hour ago
        Well, even the worst people say true things from time to time. In this case, it seems true. The US dictates how US tech is used, and this particular technology is of military significance, so I’m inclined to believe it.
        • notahackeran hour ago
          The complicating factor is that whilst it's certainly true that Starshield answers to the US chain of command, not to Elon and highly unlikely he is authorised to exercise any direct control of it, the claims that Elon personally spoke to the guy at the top of the US chain of command and persuaded him that this would be a good idea are pretty credible (and whether credible or not, US officials have been trying to place the blame on Elon rather than their own chain of command). Plus of course Ukraine absolutely does use regular Starlink, and Elon doesn't actually have magic ability to tell which terminals are being used for offensive operations and which for defensive
        • fatbirdan hour ago
          His statement is all generalities. "Decisions are made by POTUS". Not "This decision was made by POTUS"--that part you're supposed to infer from the previous. He's being quite careful not to address this instance.
        • christophilusan hour ago
          I’ll reply, rather than edit: here’s an update from Zelenskyy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50221788

          Political pressure seems to have worked.

      • hbarkaan hour ago
        Someone needs to ask Musk how much the Roadster car shell weighed during the flying demo. Then ask for an estimate when they will do a genuine demo with a 2000lb battery.
        • trainsarebetteran hour ago
          The math for the weight and fly time check out. It’s very unlikely it was a shell
    • Zagitta2 hours ago
      Musk constantly LIES, a tweet from him means literally nothing
      • mcintyre1994an hour ago
        It’s somewhat meaningful, in that you know he’s lying so the journalists reporting the opposite have good sources.
      • chneuan hour ago
        Is it still lying if he's high as a kite?
    • whoiskevin2 hours ago
      Well there you have it. Elon is so good at his word. Totally trustworthy nothing to see here /s
      • winfredJaan hour ago
        why is this downvoted.
        • phoghedan hour ago
          Because /s is stupid and it’s low effort otherwise
  • ivan_gammel2 hours ago
    Comments here somehow missing the fact that EU alternative to Starlink has already been work in progress for a while with several competitors in the game and billions € of investment. The replacement goes on, the smell of money in the air is felt quite well, digital and technology sovereignty is a popular topic on startup events.
  • smitty1e2 minutes ago
    Maybe generalize and be thoughtful about all dependencies across the board.
  • ripley122 hours ago
    Lotta "Europe could never build this!" points in here, missing that Telesat (Canadian) is already building this, planning to launch in Q1 2028, and will happily sell to Europe.
    • swat535an hour ago
      Telesat launches are still on SpaceX Falcon 9s. So the non American alternative still depends on American launch capacity to get there.

      Don't forget that US can always strong arm Canada and make it bend to its will. We are too dependent on them. It's nearly impossible to disassociate with United States due to our proximity.

      The timeline has changed before, like the ASIC issues pushed full service into 2028. Also scale and capability obviously differ, but it could be a good starting point.

      Regardless, I think Europe is better served focusing on its own tech like IRIS and Eutelsat.

    • tlogan34 minutes ago
      Telesat is a different product than StarLink. My understanding is that Telestat is for telecom operators and large network providers which cannot run fibre cables to their cell towers.
    • schleck82 hours ago
      ICEYE from Finland is valued at 12 billion USD
    • dudulan hour ago
      Lotta "Europe is already working on it!" points in here, missing the fact that it's been in the work for a long time, and maybe let's wait until it's actually deployed to count the cows. Over the past decades a lot of things have been "in the work" in Europe and never really went anywhere. It's very easy to "put things in the work".
      • msabalauan hour ago
        The ending of the original article" was:

        "Going forward a U.S. founder selling into European defense or government now needs an answer to “who holds the switch” before the first meeting; and European founders just got sovereignty as a sellable feature.

        What was done in a fit of pique will cost the U.S. both leadership and jobs."

        Do you agree or disagree with that?

    • paxy2 hours ago
      Replacing dependency on one foreign power with another foreign power is better how?
      • ripley122 hours ago
        For one, Canada's been getting much closer to the EU recently: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjwyzrr9d3dko

        And Canada is a lot more stable than the US lately.

        • paxy3 minutes ago
          USA was also close to the EU until it wasn't. Outsourcing critical parts of national security and infrastructure to any country is idiotic, friendly or not.
        • phoghed42 minutes ago
          What makes you think they aren’t one election away from a US style shit show too?
      • eterps2 hours ago
        Canada is becoming a lot less foreign to Europe than US on the current trajectory.
      • protimewaster2 hours ago
        If the goal is to replace US technology, replacing it with Canadian technology does, in fact, accomplish that goal.
      • ghusto2 hours ago
        I just replaced a dependency that that fucked all its users with an open source alternative that can not do that in the future. Sometimes what you're replacing it with does make a difference.
      • 2 hours ago
        undefined
      • BoxwoodSeed2 hours ago
        Wasn't there news of Canada kinda, sorta but not really getting into being part of the EU recently? To begin with, the EU is just a bunch of independent countries getting cozy with each other.
        • lbourdages2 hours ago
          There are discussions of "associate membership" but since this is not a thing that exists yet speculation on the matter has ranged from "this is just an economic partnership" to "we are going to become de-facto EU members".

          We'll see the details when this becomes a bit more concrete but I imagine it's mostly going to be an economic partnership via trade agreements, maybe aligning some regulations to facilitate trade, etc.

      • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
        The US is becoming to Canada what North Korea is to South Korea.

        Yes, hyperbole, but funny/sad.

        Also, have you heard Mark Carney speak, and contrasted it with how Trump speaks. It's like The Freeze versus randomly chosen baseball fan (https://youtu.be/WxXypNqiS5A).

        • 2 hours ago
          undefined
      • jonathanstrange2 hours ago
        It's certainly wise to diversify as much as possible, a healthy mix of sovereign home-made tech plus US and Chinese tech and from all other countries where it seems fit. The problem right now is the extreme dependence on US tech, such a dependence is always a bad idea no matter what country the tech comes from.
        • graemep2 hours ago
          I think the other thing that is not being discussed is jointly developed tech, and jointly controlled systems - if its not controlled by any one party the dependency problem does not exist.
      • ranger_danger2 hours ago
        When it's not likely that Canada is going to betray you, I would argue it's better than depending on the US.
      • koonsoloan hour ago
        Canada is not a huge world power, so it realizes it needs friends. European countries are all in the same boat.

        I wouldn't trust any country where the citizens somehow think they are bigger, better and stronger than anyone else.

        • zeroc8an hour ago
          Well, bigger they are. Horizontally at least.
  • d5lt52 hours ago
    > The decision of the U.S. to shut off intelligence and throttle the military version of Starlink called Starshield to Ukraine.

    Ukraine does not use Starshield, only Starlink. Take this article with a grain of salt.

    The rumor [0][1] is that both Ukraine and Russia install GPS spoofers as a workaround for geofencing. Another rumor is that Starlink recently updated their software to detect and block such attempts that is based on rapid satellite switch detection by the Starlink terminal that happened if the terminal was moving faster than 160km/h.

    [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/10/12/starlink-rus...

    [1] https://flasharmy.com.ua/en/vneshnij-gps-dlya-starlink

  • Mikhail_Edoshin43 minutes ago
    I am not an expert, so I'm retelling what I myself read.

    A Starlink terminal has a detail that reports its location. There is a restriction on location, so if a terminal reports a restricted location, it gets blocked. A terminal may get blocked either because it actually got off the territory or if it the GPS signal was somehow distorted. So all terminals that go into Ukraine are hacked: they get a chip that reports a fixed location. This allows both to fight the distortions and to ignore the restrictions. (For some time this hack allowed use of Starlink on either side; then a white list of terminals came into effect.)

    Ukraine never used (maybe didn't have access to) neither the military subsystem, nor the high-speed tariffs (which are way more expensive). The tariffs they use limit the moving speed of a terminal to 100 mph (160 kmph). For some time the limit was not enforced so drones just flew at any speed.

    Around the end of 2025 the limit started to get enforced. But initially the technology relied on the data of a GPS chip. Since the terminal was hacked, the GPS chip reported the same data and thus appeared static. The enforcement thus did not work for these terminals. So although the limit was always there and has been technically enforced for a good part of a year everything was quiet as things simply continued to work as they always did.

    But it is possible to detect the hack if one checks how frequently a terminal changes the satellite it connects to. This improvement was made recently and rendered the hack unusable on high-speed targets. This is the point we are at.

    • darkwi11ow36 minutes ago
      Ukraine uses Starshield, which is paid by Germany (with current contract ending in April 2027). What you describe in regards to chip hacking so it reports location as static, it is how nazi invaders got it working in a small chunk of time during 2025, before whitelisting was introduced for the terminals.
  • LurkandComment2 hours ago
    1. EU was slowly doing this in some tech industries and its really going to pick up speed

    2. They don't have to replace a lot of US tech before the economic impact compounds to effect the US.

    • petcatan hour ago
      The problem is the EU is still suffering startup drain to USA entirely because of market and regulatory burdens. We just saw this most recently with Heart Aerospace. They warned EU regulators repeatedly that it was very difficult to develop frontier technology in Europe. And then they eventually just relocated to California completely.

      https://www.heartaerospace.com/newsroom/heart-aerospace-relo...

      These are political and societal issues that are very difficult to solve. Not to mention that energy insecurity and cost makes Europe non-competitive from the outset.

      • ivan_gammel42 minutes ago
        This particular example is hardly representative. The market they work on is difficult. They may have an ambition to become Tesla of airplanes, but it did not take a long time before traditional manufacturers learned from Tesla’s success and took over. VW builds more electric cars, and number one globally is a Chinese company. With airplanes, becoming an independent manufacturer is a long and risky path. In the end, their main choice is between being acquired by Boeing or Airbus if they are successful, or being outcompeted by incumbents or Chinese. I do not think this reflects the investment climate in Europe in general. There are fields where startups can do well, and fields where starting something new in Europe is generally a bad idea. I’m not sure that’s always because of regulations.
      • koonsolo29 minutes ago
        All the money is in Silicon Valley, that's why they move there.

        If this was a US vs EU thing, I would love to hear a US tech giant that isn't in Silicon Valley or Seattle.

        Fact is, even in US, no other city was able to replicate that success. For example, there would be no point to move your startup from EU to New York for example.

        • petcat21 minutes ago
          Micron was founded in Boise Idaho and is still headquartered there. Cymer, which makes the EUV light source in ASML machines, was founded in San Diego, and is still there.
  • elthor892 hours ago
    I think Galileo is an example of how the EU with ESA can create an alternative to a critical US capability. At the same time it is also an example how difficult it is, on a financial, political and commercial level.

    The US wasn’t happy with it and tried to put pressure not to proceed. In hindsight , It’s good that it did got into orbit.

    ESA tends to favour French, Italian and German big state owned corporations rather than small start ups. So it will always be a political thing and slow.

    There just isn’t a company in the EU that can operate like Elon Musk. Even if there was imagine a European company ceo holding that power. How would they use it, can they be coerced by EU countries? Should such a capability be in private hands at all?

  • felineflockan hour ago
    "An American company operating critical military infrastructure was able to degrade the capability of an American partner in the middle of a war."

    Is Ukraine an "American partner" ???

  • __natty__2 hours ago
    That’s also great reason to start investing in Europe during next economical cycle
    • andsoitis2 hours ago
      > during next economical cycle

      what and when is the the "next" economic cycle?

      • petcatan hour ago
        I think there's a lot of economic uncertainty right now about the looming French bailout. Maybe the "next" cycle is whatever happens after that?
  • Zenul_Abidin2 hours ago
    Europe should start by reducing the amount of legal paperwork required in running a business, because that is the main reason why founders flee to places such as the US
    • malfist2 hours ago
      That's why the famously over regulated California doesn't have any sort of tech scene. All the best big startups usually start somewhere more business friendly like Mississippi or Tennessee
      • BLKNSLVRan hour ago
        Is there an inverse relationship between "places people would like to live" and "places that are business friendly"?
    • LtWorf2 hours ago
      When I read "I don't want to follow safety regulations", I always think "WOW that dude must really have some great product I must get!" -_-'
    • ErroneousBoshan hour ago
      What would you like to see less "legal paperwork" about? What regulations would you want rid of?

      Do you think you would stand even the tiniest chance of hiring European tech workers into a company run the way they are in the US?

    • jonathanstrange2 hours ago
      Absolutely. That and the lack of accessible and agile VC funding in Europe. No idea why someone would downvote the above comment, it's spot on.
  • tlogan27 minutes ago
    The fact is that there are only two real potential competitors to Starlink:

    - Amazon LEO (US)

    - Qianfan (China)

    The European (IRIS) and Canadian (Telesat) satellite systems are relatively small and more specialized.

  • Flere-Imsahoan hour ago
    It'll never happen unfortunately.

    The next president will get elected, and then we'll go back to being best buddies with the US, including using their tech.

    • BLKNSLVRan hour ago
      Maybe, but I think the likelier outcome is that they will also be working on alternatives in the background.
  • petcat3 hours ago
    > In the years ahead, this may cost American companies tens if not hundreds of billions of lost revenue.

    Europe would first have to invest "tens if not hundreds of billions" themselves in order to develop any viable replacements and that is very unlikely to ever happen.

    They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things like datacenters which are essentially just industrial compute factories and the foundation for anything pertaining to data sovereignty and technology sovereignty.

    • jacquesm2 hours ago
      > that is very unlikely to ever happen.

      It's already happening.

      > They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things like datacenters which are essentially just industrial compute factories and the foundation for anything pertaining to data sovereignty and technology sovereignty.

      No, they are not entirely blind to the consequences of this buildout and are trying to find a balance between environmental concerns and technological progress.

      I agree that we should probably do more but to use words like 'societally paralyzed' is rather uninformed about what actual democracies look like.

      edit: never mind, I just checked your comment history, this seems to be some thing that you are repeating over and over and getting the same kind of answers but you just keep doing it.

      • user439282 hours ago
        If Europe can't even build data centers, which come with low to moderate environmental impact, they won't manage to deploy a Starlink alternative either.

        Even though they could use SpaceX launch capacity to deploy such a constellation, Europe has no such plans.

        Your comment seems to reinforce the parent's opinion about societal paralyzation.

        Europe can claim to be cleaner or more democratic, but it doesn't change that they get nothing done.

        • radicalbyte2 hours ago
          We're building data centres, there are several massive ones in my tiny little country (NL). We're also quite capable of putting satellites into orbit. We have swarms of these small satellites just not quite at the scale of StarLink and they're doing science.

          Your claim makes as much sense as saying that the US can't even build airliners. Sure they can't build good ones. That was a decision to replace the technically capable management at Boeing with an army of MBAs. Sure Airbus are a decade ahead but the US can still build them.

          The thing which many people forget was that, up until the current POTUS decided to reverse course, we were best buddies. We've invested a huge amount of money in US-based companies and generally worked together to increase the size of the pie for everyone.

          • user43928an hour ago
            Sure, but are we building them fast enough?

            Our current global share of AI compute is estimated at 5%, US at 78%, China 11%.

            We're projected to briefly rise to 8% around 2028, and back to 5% for 2031.

            That does not look like sovereignty and independence from the US.

            • jacquesm7 minutes ago
              No, we're not building them fast enough, but there is a lot of money being poured into this space right now, the big bottlenecks are power, RAM and GPUs. We're also spending a lot on Putin's idiocy so there are some other things that aren't helping.
      • radicalbyte2 hours ago
        >edit: never mind, I just checked your comment history, this seems to be some thing that you are repeating over and over and getting the same kind of answers but you just keep doing it

        I've noticed this with people in tech who spend too much time on Twitter. They have a very weird view of Europe. It used to be the Fox New boomers but it has spread to people who you'd assume were pretty smart.

        To be honest it's part of the reason I left Twitter and only visit this site rarely. Sucks as I've had some awesome discussions here in the past.

        My suspicion is that it's related to the drop in standards in tech since the big ramp up in the 2010s and the way Meta and the crypto folks don't want regulation so a lot of their employees have a vested interested in bashing the organisation capable of actually introducing some good regulation.

      • rayiner2 hours ago
        > never mind, I just checked your comment history, this seems to be some thing that you are repeating over and over and getting the same kind of answers but you just keep doing it.

        So what? People have a point of view. You certainly do.

        • jacquesm2 hours ago
          Rayiner, you are not going to bait me into giving you a piece of my mind because unlike you when you cross the lines (repeatedly, egregiously) I would likely get banned from HN.
      • rwc2 hours ago
        [flagged]
        • jacquesm2 hours ago
          Sclerotic eh?

          Wow.

          "grown rigid or unresponsive especially with age"

          As opposed to what?

          What's next, a 'greed is good' sermon?

          • hackyhacky2 hours ago
            > "grown rigid or unresponsive especially with age"

            > As opposed to what?

            As opposed to the famously agile and youthful atmosphere of American legislation in technology.

            /s

        • Geezus_422 hours ago
          So what, we just let corporations steam roll people even more than they already do?
    • legacynl2 hours ago
      Propagandists have long figured out that you don't have to control people's thoughts and opinions. You just need to go into their public forum and say some outrageous shit, it doesn't have to be right, well thought out, you just need to shout some shit, so that you get to control the topics that people talk about.

      Everytime something about EU tech sovereignty is posted, comments with sentiments like OP are posted within the first several minutes. Because they're outrageous (anger-inducing) they get a lot of comments telling them off, an resultingly will be presented prominently on the page.

      How much effort and resources does it really cost to have some bots doing this kind of stuff on a couple of well-visited platforms? As techies we should understand that it's basically costs no resources, time and effort. Therefore we should expect these kinds of influence operations on public forums like these.

      • andix2 hours ago
        I'm not sure if those comments are even bots. The bots seem to only amplify those opinions and make them more visible. It's a vicious circle, once those opinions are everywhere, more and more people pick up on them and write new posts like that.
      • somenameforme2 hours ago
        I think the claims about propaganda can often be nullified pretty easily, by simply turning it around. Were it remotely possible to push people in any direction whatsoever then the powers that be would be spending every possible effort, with 'insider access' no less, to tilt people in that direction. And, for the most part, they are. But it simply does not work, at least not on topics that people had any preconceived opinions of before at all. See: Israel/Gaza.

        As for Europe, this [1] is a graph of the EU's share of the global GDP, PPP adjusted. It's been in steady decline for decades. And so discussing the decline of Europe, at least relative to the rest of the world, is hardly outrageous.

        [1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/253512/share-of-the-eu-i...

        • jacquesm2 hours ago
          Nice such lying with statistics, you should give a course.

          Of course this little graph fails to account for the fact that the EU took on the burden of paying for 50 years of back maintenance in former USSR countries. And on balance the change has been very positive. It will take at least another 30 years to reach parity.

      • user439282 hours ago
        Accusations like these are against the HN guidelines by the way.

        They are often unfounded and obviously incorrect when made towards old accounts with established history of posting.

      • thin_carapace2 hours ago
        do you suppose that the average tech worker is socially perceptive enough to determine the occurence of their manipulation? seems to me that most tech workers cease consideration of consequences after accepting their role.
        • jacquesm2 hours ago
          Assuming their not actively engaging in it in the first place.
    • ghusto2 hours ago
      > Europe would first have to invest "tens if not hundreds of billions" themselves in order to develop any viable replacements and that is very unlikely to ever happen

      It's _been_ happening. Why do you think something that delivers jobs, boosts the economy, and is an easier and easier political and popular sell everyday, is unlikely?

      > They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things like datacenters

      That's also happening. It's just that we're not as gung-ho about doing things at any cost.

      • brandonagr2an hour ago
        Unless your plan is to pay SpaceX to launch this constellation, 'it' (developing both launch and a constellation to rival starlink) has not been happening in europe
        • user4392832 minutes ago
          When I was checking earlier, it seems some European projects will use SpaceX to launch. Probably makes sense economically.

          From what I saw Europe has no plan to launch a large constellation that could become an alternative to Starlink. The ambition apparently does not exist.

        • Renaudan hour ago
          IRIS² and Ariane 6 would like a word with you.
          • phoghed27 minutes ago
            Ariane is already launching Amazon satellites, but IRIS is many years away from being anything.
    • gmueckl2 hours ago
      You'd be surprised at how much is suddenly possible in the EU once politicians feel real fire under their butts.
      • timmg2 hours ago
        I really hope so. Honestly.

        Trump may accidentally be the best thing that happened to Europe. (I think a lot of the Chinese give him credit, due to his behavior in his first term.)

        • gmueckl2 hours ago
          The real question is the minimum temperature to make them respond. I hope that it's a much a lower setting than "Oh shit, the Russians are already marching towards Warsaw/Helsinki!"
    • afavour2 hours ago
      > They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things like datacenters

      The only reason the US is not paralyzed is because the government is completely disregarding the views of voters on the topic. I struggle to see that as better.

      (before someone says it: yes, I think the anti-data center sentiment is overblown. But the answer is convincing voters of why it’s good, not ignoring them)

    • tomrod2 hours ago
      The amount depends on the margins to a degree. Now that tech XYZ exists, building a mimic probably requires less R&D, no?
    • hbarka2 hours ago
      Airbus > Boeing
      • ponector2 hours ago
        Depends on criteria. Flying doors? Boeing wins
      • verdverman hour ago
        In civilian aircraft, yes; freight no; military no

        https://theflyingengineer.com/boeing-vs-airbus-orders-2026/

      • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
        Graduate engineer > Boeing
      • mopsian hour ago
        Had you picked Ericsson or Nokia, there wouldn't even have been anyone comparable to put on the right side of the expression.

        It's really strange to see that for so many people "tech" means just a handful of US megacorporations, none of which produce critical products like medical equipment or marine engines or industrial robots or railway signaling systems.

    • sauercrowd2 hours ago
      You are describing Europe as a homogeneous entity, that's not what it is.

      While the overarching opinion of AI might be more negative, there's plenty of people pushing for exactly what you're describing, despite hurdles in regulation and also a fragmented market.

      What's pretty clear from talking to companies of every size is that most leaders now understand how important it is.

    • cowlevelan hour ago
      I'm not sure where you got this information, but there are datacenters in the EU. In fact the EU colo/internet market is much more competitive than the US one. Maybe this makes it look smaller when measured in dollars because providers can't squeeze insane profits? Not sure.
    • sarjann2 hours ago
      I mean they do also provide US tech companies a lot of revenue (from EU customers).

      Countries like China, Russia have largely blocked western tech and as a result domestic technology companies developed to suck up demand. Some things like having a unified capital market would help Europe. This is something they could work to solving, it's more a political question.

    • ranger_danger2 hours ago
      > They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things like datacenters

      Last I checked they were everywhere in Europe.

      How did they get there in the first place if they're so allergic to them?

    • locknitpicker2 hours ago
      > Europe would first have to invest "tens if not hundreds of billions" themselves in order to develop any viable replacements and that is very unlikely to ever happen.

      It seems you've been living under a rock. Europe is already started investing those billions on non-US providers, and the US is already complaining it's not fair.

      https://www.euronews.com/2026/09/30/us-ambassador-slams-eus-...

      > They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things like (...)

      You're spending too much time in your alt-right pipeline. Europe already mobilized to cover around 80% of Ukraine's external aid, and is providing Ukraine with long range missiles and even drone technology, which the US conspicuously lacks.

      Even this week there were news reports that Ukraine was now looking at Eutelsat to replace StarLink.

      Trump,remaining true to his Russian asset fame, has been undermining the US in multiple fronts including diplomacy and defence treaties, and is literally pressuring Ukraine to capitulate to Russia. The sole reason why this plan hasn't succeeded is the fact that, unlike your claim, Europe stepped up and silently filled the role and responsibilities that the US held previously in NATO and Europe's security infrastructure. Therefore, Trump's threats to withhold support now lack any weight, rendering these threats completely ineffective. Thanks to Europe.

      Europe's work was so successful to the point where Trump himself is throwing desperate lifelines at Putin's regime with actions such as lifting self-imposed blockaded to buy diesel straight from Putin, and demanding Zelensky resigned for Ukraine's success in attacking Russia's critical infrastructure. That tells you all there is to know on how far Europe stepped up.

    • Ylpertnodi2 hours ago
      There are several datacenters in the EU.
    • ForHackernews2 hours ago
      Strongly disagree that centralized data centres are the foundation of technological sovereignty. Europe could, if it chose, strike a different course: inexpensive, locally-hosted systems. They could embrace personal computing and individual sovereignty instead of the American model of cloud-hosted surveillance tech that lives in giant data centres.
      • gmueckl2 hours ago
        This is getting priced out of the market for the foreseeable future: thick clients are getting squeezed out of the hardware market because rhe componemt prices are surging - the datacenter builders are trying to gobble it all up.

        Meaningful local computer power could only survive realistically if exceptionally high demand (multiples of that of AI data centers) could be generated within weeks/months to get the semiconductor companies to pivot and sell the components mainly though other channels.

        64GB laptops are no longer in stores. 32 GB is probably going to get squeezed out soon. For prebuilt desktops it's the same. That's no basis for meaningful local, decentralized compute.

      • MPSimmonsan hour ago
        I'm afraid that technological sovereignty is secondary to military superiority when the governments in question value might over justice. It seems that you can apply financial leverage to avoid violence but I think everyone has to play ball.
      • mjdiloreto2 hours ago
        They _could_ but is there any reason to suggest Europe is any more likely to embrace this approach than the US or China?
        • mrtesthah2 hours ago
          European countries have been embracing and funding free software at all levels of government and business at an accelerating rate, and doing so with the same ethos of personal freedom and autonomy. It would make sense to continue to that trajectory in other technological areas.
      • bethekidyouwantan hour ago
        How could a disparate network of personal computers ever hope to compete with the centralized data centres? you’re just asking to lose the race.
    • sandworm1012 hours ago
      Lol. Change the mindset. Russia is getting similar results (controlling drones at a distance) without spending much of anything. Russia is using mesh radios to create and maintain communications over similar distances without any space assets.

      Your enemy is always your best teacher. Pay attention when they demonstrate a new skill.

    • dastardly452 hours ago
      Trump and his tech bros have alienated Europe and other democracies in the world. What the US is currently doing by openly supporting far right movements in Europe (and Brazil) while serving Putin's wishes have revealed a US on the wrong side of history. The remnants of American democracy is paralysed and US is sliding into fascism. Boycott US will be a fast growing movement in democracies all over the world.
    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
    • coolboy12 hours ago
      [flagged]
      • jacquesm2 hours ago
        Someone ban this account please.
        • 2 hours ago
          undefined
    • legacynl2 hours ago
      > They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things

      Lmao. Says the country that is to politically paralyzed to even maintain roads and sewers.

      • bix62 hours ago
        Hey not fair! We’re building a really big wall right now ok!!!! It’s super important.
      • mancerayder2 hours ago
        We're not paralyzed, we just delay and delay until it breaks and costs a lot more to fix.

        For the cynical but factually curious look up the history of the ARC project, and NJ governor Chris Christie who canned it - this was to upgrade the tunnel that hosts the biggest train lines in the country (Northeast Corridor). Guess what - it has to happen, just at a much higher costs.

        The United States fails at infrastructure because it's too decentralized. You don't build with anything four year terms and corrupt politicians. It's too short-term.

      • danw19792 hours ago
        hi, it’s Hammersmith Bridge and every water company in the UK on line one for you.
        • myko2 hours ago
          The UK famously left the EU (likely due to the same external pressure that delivered trump to the US)
          • danw19792 hours ago
            We’re still a European country.
            • whynotmaybe2 hours ago
              On which criteria? Since Margaret Thatcher said she wanted her money back, and even more since Brexit, UK is geographically in Europe, just like Switzerland or Ukraine, but definitely hasn't the "European Mindset", UK is its own thing as they've always wanted to be.
              • graemep2 hours ago
                What is the "European mindset"? that of Norway, Ireland, Greece, Poland.....?
                • whynotmaybean hour ago
                  The one that created the European Union
            • GCUMstlyHarmls2 hours ago
              Yes but there is an English breakfast and a Continental breakfast.
            • TheOtherHobbes2 hours ago
              Wholly owned by offshore billionaires.
          • dastardly45an hour ago
            External pressure in the form of disinformation disseminated by American propaganda platforms utilising Cambridge Analytica style techniques
      • neutronicus2 hours ago
        Hey, roads are the only thing we actually maintain
        • tortillaan hour ago
          We have the best stroads in the world.
      • mschuster912 hours ago
        > Says the country that is to politically paralyzed to even maintain roads and sewers.

        German here, to be fair, we have our difficulties with that too, thanks to 40 years of neoliberalism and tax-cutting orgies eroding the financial base making that possible.

        • yorwba2 hours ago
          Not replacing expensive infrastructure before it really needs to be replaced is simply the economically better choice. If you replace it earlier, you have all the same issues with not being able to use it while construction is ongoing and the same costs and so on, so all you achieve with a replacement ahead of schedule is to artificially cut short the lifespan of perfectly usable infrastructure.
          • mschuster912 hours ago
            > Not replacing expensive infrastructure before it really needs to be replaced is simply the economically better choice.

            I'm not talking about replacement. I'm talking about basic maintenance, because turns out when you don't go and, say, regularly paint over steel parts to save money, eventually rust will creep in and force an expensive replacement of the entire structure that would not have been needed with regular maintenance.

  • chasd002 hours ago
    Why would you rely on another nation for defense infrastructure? It makes zero sense for Europe to rely on starshield in the first place.
    • AlecSchueler2 hours ago
      Europe itself a collection of nations. The US was traditionally an ally and for the better part of a century we've been comfortably building out a host of projects together, from military to science to cultural goods. That the US has apparently stepped away from working cooperatively is genuinely surprising and disappointing, but we shouldn't let it normalise the idea that we can only ever trust others of our own nation. Especially in Europe where you obviously have countries like Belgium that aren't nation states to begin with.
      • squidbeak2 hours ago
        > Especially in Europe where you obviously have countries like Belgium that aren't nation states to begin with.

        Belgium has been independent for almost 200 years, and is one of the founding members of the the UN. In what possible way is it not a nation state?

      • jacquesm2 hours ago
        Belgium absolutely is a nation state. They're as sovereign as the United States is. In some ways more sovereign.
        • jcranmer2 hours ago
          If we're being pedantic, the US is not a nation-state (because the US doesn't really have a coherent "nation"), and I suspect for similar reasons you could claim that Belgium is not a coherent nation either, given the Flemish/Walloon divisions in the state.

          That said, a lot of people use nation state as a synonym for sovereign state, and Belgium is as much a sovereign state as the US is.

          • jacquesm2 hours ago
            Belgium actually obeys their constitution, they're capable of reigning in excesses. Yes, the four (not two) language areas (Vlaanderen, Wallonia, the German area and the twin language area of Bruxelles) of the country are a massive complication, but I actually really like how they manage to get along in spite of it.

            There are many other countries in Europe (and outside of it) that are multi-lingual and for the most part having a single language is not a core requirement for being a nation state.

        • tengwar2an hour ago
          Belgium is a state, and not a nation. "Nation state" has a specific meaning, separate from "state". Belgium has two major cultural groups (Walloon and Flemish) who tend to be at odds with each other, hence is not a nation. Contrast Kurdistan, which is a nation but not a state.
          • jacquesman hour ago
            If you want to get really pedantic then Belgium is a 'multinational state'.
            • tengwar2an hour ago
              This isn't about pedantry, it's about not using a phrase incorrectly and through doing so giving misinformation. Pedantry might be pointing out that "foot pedal" is redundant - all pedals are foot-operated by definition. That wouldn't matter because the meaning is unaltered by the redundancy. However saying that Belgium (or the USA) is a nation state is simply incorrect.
        • AlecSchueleran hour ago
          I never questioned Belgium's sovereignty.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_state

    • jcranmer2 hours ago
      Most countries are roughly the size of a US state. How many US states could be entirely self-sufficient on defense infrastructure?
      • ghusto2 hours ago
        All the ones that were doing so, before they started relying on the America. Believe it or not, the world still span before the USA.
        • jcranmeran hour ago
          I think you misread the question I asked.

          Nonetheless, even today, the vast majority of countries are not self-sufficient on defense infrastructure, and this has been true for most of the modern era. The most obvious deficiency is in naval terms: the number of countries who have enough of a navy that they can do something about "my shipping is being attacked by pirates" without help from other people is plausibly at most five (US, UK, France, Russia, China), and I have my doubts about half of those.

      • AngryDataan hour ago
        All of them as long as they didn't keep spending money on bombing poor people.
    • ghusto2 hours ago
      Because until a certain orangutang broke it, the new world order was doing rather nicely.

      Powerful people got together and decided the world would be a nice place if everyone worked together. Their solution for ensuring that happened whilst taking human behaviours into account was global capitalism.

      Despite its downsides (some of which we're only starting to see the consequences of) you have to admit that it was doing its job. Countries were cooperating because it was in their best interest. It was always a delicate thing though, and the orangutang broke the trust it relied on.

      It might seem naive now, but "bro, of _course_ you can rely on us for service X, why are you even asking?" was an believable response before the orange.

    • LightBug1an hour ago
      Only if you ignore the last 100 years of geopolitics. But, fair point.
    • bagacrap2 hours ago
      Not just infrastructure. Europe has depended on the US for its entire defense apparatus for decades. Everyone loves to scoff at the billions America throws away on fighter jets until Putin rolls out of bed and invades your nextdoor neighbor.
      • TheOtherHobbes2 hours ago
        Europe has been forced to depend on the US. The UK particularly had a world-leading civil and military aviation industry until the US "suggested" this was unwelcome.

        The UK signed an agreement with the US to supply research for the Manhattan Project, in the naive belief the results would be shared.

        The US said "Nuh uh - that's classified" and the UK had to develop its own program from scratch.

        Then the US lobbied to have that thrown away so the UK would be locked into Polaris and then Trident.

        And so on. NATO has very much been a showroom for US arms sales, and competition has been discouraged - not always effectively, but the implied pressure has always been there.

  • bix62 hours ago
    Elon and Trump have effectively destroyed America’s soft power which was probably the goal because somehow that makes them richer who knows. Either way the world is no longer going to trust US companies. Europes VC scene is comparatively weak but if I were European I would be investing heavily right now as the local demand for homegrown services will surely skyrocket. This was a huge mistake for American Businesses as the European market will be significantly more difficult to earn now.
    • Zigurd2 hours ago
      There's a rule of thumb that a mature tech business in the US will earn at least half of its revenue outside the US. If that stops being true, it halves the early stage value of tech companies in the US.
      • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
        Something something Anthropic IPO already down 25% of original expected value, and still a fair bit of volatile water (cough midterms cough) to go under the bridge before it goes ahead.
    • im3w1lan hour ago
      I'm thinking America (and Europe) was buying soft power at a price it could not sustainably afford. A correction was necessary. Trump took it too far though.
  • npn2 hours ago
    Revenue, not profit.

    I hope Europe all the best but there is a reason why only US companies dominating those space.

    US companies can operate in lost for many years, because they have deep pocket, and also because they have many way to earn profit.

    • yoavm2 hours ago
      There's definitely a difference there, though we will have to wait and see if the American AI industry didn't make those losing pockets too deep.
    • amanaplanacanal2 hours ago
      US companies dominated in part because everybody thought they could be trusted. That seems to be falling by the wayside.
  • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
    'Another' reason, it's most definitely not the first reason. Musk is a small cherry on a large cake.

    After sanctions for the ICC members, Europe should be getting off services that allow the US to perform the sanctions. It's very difficult though, with any organizations that continue to offer services to sanctioned individuals risking cutting themselves off from the lucrative US market.

    Ironically, Europe might need to learn a few things from Russia.

    Either way, everyone loses from this kind of behavior. International cooperation is generally the most efficient way of operating. Looks like that's done for until the new world order is settled, and the US is going to flail wildly for a good decade or two to prevent that from happening (despite the current administration accelerating it, under the impression they can win everything, which is now demonstrably categorically false).

  • ndom912 hours ago
    This isn't the first wake-up call.. remember Trump putting a certain ICC judge on a newly created black list that required MS to disable their O365 email services?

    https://sota.io/blog/icc-microsoft-opendesk-migration-cloud-...

    Many EU agencies, member governments, NGOs, etc. moving to open source alternatives since then.

  • variant2 hours ago
    Instead, Europe will add more regulation, suffocating its ability to replace technology with its own.
  • lobo_tuerto2 hours ago
    The truth is, if they could they would, and they should. But they can't, not yet.
  • therealpygonan hour ago
    I’d be surprised if an investor lawsuit doesn’t come out of this in order to get depositions from Musk under oath. I would certainly sign on, being an investor in SpaceX whose investment was put at risk by these antics, regardless of who ordered or didn’t. If it was because of government order, I have no problem because the company had no choice, if it is because he decided to invoke his personal views this way, I got a big problem as that puts at risk every lucrative government contract.
  • cs702an hour ago
    Sigh. Steve Blank is probably right about this:

    > In the years ahead, this may cost American companies tens if not hundreds of billions of lost revenue.

    The question is, if European governments and businesses conclude they cannot trust non-European software and hardware, what can they do about it?

    On the software side, it seems to me the only realistic alternative they have is to build upon existing open-source projects.

    On the hardware side, their options seem more limited to me, but I'm not an expert on the subject.

  • krisroadruck2 hours ago
    Europe threatening the US with a good time? Imagine a world where all of our best companies didn't have to contort themselves to adhere to the random patchwork of regulations the EU throws at it to justify endless rent extraction through fines? Oh no! They might have to innovate for themselves using checks notes US AI software to reverse engineer US SaaS? What a joke of an article.
    • dieortin2 hours ago
      Yeah, because US companies are forced to offer their services in the EU, right? And they definitely don’t do so because it’s incredibly profitable. Plus, the US definitely hates that the EU depends on them for so many things, giving them huge power and leverage.

      What a great point you’re making here!

  • avazhi44 minutes ago
    Yes please Europe - decouple from America. We are rooting for you!

    Make sure you guys also make your own European-only version of the internet, too, so the rest of us (us as in the rest of the world) can stop seeing European-centric virtue signalling spam that none of us cares about. And make sure you pass bloc-wide legislation limiting all Europeans to using only that European version of the internet (this part is important).

    Sincerely,

    -a non-American

  • 11ahsg22 minutes ago
    It is futile to discuss this before the midterms. Before the midterms we have:

    1) Rubio saying that the Iran war was basically won.

    2) Thiel saying that the US should not have started the Iran war!

    3) Musk being tough on Ukraine yet again.

    4) Trump saying that Ukraine won't get Patriots (of which there is actually a shortage anyway).

    This is all election rhetoric so MAGA goes to the voting booths. It is literally the same theater as before the 2024 presidential elections. Watch what happens after the elections.

  • wnevets2 hours ago
    I don't understand why so many Europeans believed Trump in the Whitehouse wouldn't affect them.
    • illiac7862 hours ago
      90-95% of the european friends I have were scared shitless on the first term, the second one was closer to depression.
  • inglor_cz2 hours ago
    Reason, absolutely yes, but capability, no.

    Arianespace has been for decades an extension of the French government, which needed at max several launches per year and didn't give a damn about its market share. As a result, it is seriously behind in reusable rocket development. The space port in Kourou may be the most underused space port in the world, even though its location is unbeatable.

    I am not sure if this gap can be closed. Maybe some of the smaller startups like Isar Aerospace can do it, but the giants are ossified Molochs. Not that Boeing is any better, ever since absorbing MacDonnell Douglas and its pathological management structure.

    • autariocom2 hours ago
      If capability is intellecutal capability, then no. If you mean systematic capability, then yes, exactly. There are enough smart europeans to build anything. But it is rather - a lack of risk taking (i.e., culture), - a lack of incentivizes (i.e., if you take a risk, and it plays out, you benefit rather than everyone complaining how you can be rich at the expense of others), - a lack of funding risky ventures, - a lack of allowing risky ventures (i.e., politics don't allow you to do stuff because any kind of rare bat might live in close proximity). These rules make it way tougher than necessary, take longer, more compley, costly you name it...

      That is the reason why europe is falling behind. System. Not people.

    • eastbound2 hours ago
      Nonwithstanding the incompetence, maintaining the French Guyana so far away from France costs much than maintaining Cape Canaveral in the homeland. I wonder whether salaries aren't be cheaper on our aircraft carrier than in this remote land, where everything needs to be subsidized to maintain legitimacy for the rocket launchpad.
  • sleepyguy2 hours ago
    As a American Centrist/Independent , I have always believed that the Pentagon/DoD would always remain in control and be the decision makers when it comes to everything from Intelligence to comms to equipment and ordinance. But after what this Administration has done, I can no longer trust that they will act in the interests of the American people and Americas allies. This Administration has shown the world that America can never be trusted again and any safety mechanisms that were in place to stop foreign adversary control over the Presidency has failed (Republican house and senate). I am sure I am not alone in my feelings and I would encourage Europe to separate its Defense Industry, Economy/Financial institutions, trade, etc as quickly as humanly possible. Trump and the Republicans have shown that there is no friend in America and that with a group as dumb/mentally disabled/uneducated as MAGA, future American Administrations should never be trusted again. As Mark Carney(Canadian PM) has said, "We have recognized from the beginning that America has changed, and that we will not return to our old relationship" It will be one of the most difficult things Europe will face but it will guarantee your survival and protection from American Hegemony.
  • secondary_op22 minutes ago

        Elon Musk personally ordered the restrictions, and the effect was to tilt Russia’s war against Ukraine in favor of the Russians.
    
    Author of this post is idiot or liar, all that happen is just political theatrics on the verge of election. It is that simple. In election Trump promised to end war in a week, where is this promise ? Elon musk promised self driving cars and city on mars, they all crooked liars. And author of this post is possibly one of them.
  • toss1an hour ago
    What stuns me most is the utter lack of imagination, or even the ability to run through what scenarios are possible — the fact it required some idiot like Musk to actually do it for the politicians to want to act on it just stuns me.

    The same is true of Chinese technology, and if anyone thinks China isn't already embedding those kinds of capabilities in consumer goods & infrastructure hardware as well as mil hardware, I'd like to talk to you about some oceanfront property in Kansas I might have for sale.

    And to all those who would immediately comment "that's a nonsense accusation, they would never do that" or "that's a biased/racist/nationalist accusation": NO, just look at the reality of what has already been found, I'm not accusing only China - everyone does it, and mostly, you are EXACTLY the same people who didn't understand the threat from US tech companies until Elon actually pulled the switch.

    As in the cryptocoin "Not your keys, not your coins", this is:

    "Not your tech stack, not your sovereignty"

    The EU REALLY needs to step up and build their own tech stack.

    Looks like it is starting to happen, and Elon just gave them the most solid reason. This will cost US tech and mil giants $$trillions. Or, they will have to go back to building systems that verifiably have no external control.

  • LightBug1an hour ago
    Welcome to the party.

    Fuck that obnoxious wanker.

  • zuInnp2 hours ago
    I mean there are like a million reasons to replace American technology since .. well you know when...
    • BLKNSLVRan hour ago
      But honestly, even well before that.

      When did Doctorow coin enshittification?

      When did Zuck call his users stupid fucks?

      When did Amazon start comingling counterfeits with originals?

      When did Google buy DoubleClick?

      When did Google start reading your Gmail?

      When did Boeing start skimping on safety?

      This is a decades long trend. Don't be giving Trump credit he doesn't deserve, otherwise the lessons of history will not be learned. Blaming Trump is yet another easy answer that allows for all of the other things to be swept under the rug.

  • specialistan hour ago
    Another reason.
  • jmclnx3 hours ago
    > Elon Musk Just Gave Europe a Reason to Replace American Technology

    Should be "Elon Musk Just Gave Europe yet another Reason to Replace American Technology"

  • SecretDreams2 hours ago
    > Elon Musk Just Gave Europe *Another* Reason to Replace American Technology

    Fixed that for you

  • bethekidyouwantan hour ago
    The story here is clearly that Trump wants Ukraine to stop blowing up refineries so that domestically the price of diesel goes down. If you don’t agree with that fine but I’m not sure why we’re blaming Elon Musk. (that was hyperbole I know exactly why you’re blaming him.)
    • christophilusan hour ago
      Well, it’ll take years to bring capacity back online, so that ship has sailed.
  • bilsbie2 hours ago
    [flagged]
  • squidmaster2 hours ago
    [dead]
  • anonymous9082133 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • mpweiher3 hours ago
      They are:

      https://www.techradar.com/phones/network-providers/europes-m...

      And Europe can get things done if it wants to. Ariane had reached 50% of commercial GTO launches in 2010.

      ...the Arianespace consortium "all but invented the commercial launch business in the 1980s" principally "by ignoring U.S. government assurances that the reusable U.S. space shuttle would make expendable launch vehicles like Ariane obsolete.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_launch_market_competitio...

      SpaceX has disrupted that, but once the innovation is out there it can be replicated.

    • Grombobulous2 hours ago
      If you’re talking about device attestation, I see no particular way in which the technology is locked down to Google/Apple. Another phone/OS manufacturer could implement the same mechanism.
      • summm2 hours ago
        We have a mobile OS duopoly. There is nothing that can replace it in any forseeable future. Remote attestation is deeply anti-competitive, and also is exactly the mechanism used to ensure it stays this way.
        • Grombobulous2 hours ago
          I see this as a chicken and egg issue. Small competitors like SailfishOS and GrapheneOS already face the challenge of having a comparatively minuscule customer base.

          The way the EU and some other countries approach issues like this is to consider Apple and Google regulated monopolies. They must allow alternative app stores and follow other rules that normal non-monopoly businesses don’t have to follow.

          There’s nothing about device attestation that is any more or less challenging than their status quo predicament.

          Somewhat related, on the HN home page today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50217495

          • summm2 hours ago
            For any of those regulation attempts, the duopoly has been coming up with another countermeasure that delayed and nullified the main effect.

            Remote attestation as a broadly used technology will in itself protect the duopoly. Without it, smaller competitors could just offer an alternative that is automatically compatible with the app or service ecosystem, implement compatibility layers or client software compatible to that services.

            Now they can't, because even if they offered their own remote attestation service, they would need to convince every app supplier individually to explicitly support their system.

            The only way to enable any kind of growing competition would be to outright abolish hostile technologies like remote attestation, bootloader lockdown and so on.

    • chrisjj3 hours ago
      > Europe is too busy mandating that every citizen use a Google or Apple phone for digital ID

      Total fiction.

      • anonymous9082132 hours ago
        https://eudi-wallet.gov.de/en/faq?utm

        > Do I need a Google or Apple account?

        > The national [EU Digital Identity] Wallet does not need an account/login. Users can use the wallet without creating any account/login. Independently of this, the App Store and Google Play Store require an account for the user to install any application.

        My original comment has proven extremely controversial, pingponging +-5 votes. I understand the truth is upsetting. However, perhaps our friendly irritated Europeans might rather direct that ire at the people selling out their countries and not the messenger who points out reality?

        • Grombobulous2 hours ago
          Right there in the FAQ:

          > DO I HAVE TO USE THE STATE EUDI WALLET?

          > No, use is voluntary and free of charge.

          Your comment is controversial because you’re willfully misrepresenting fact.

          • anonymous9082132 hours ago
            For now. You are completely devoid of foresight if you can't see where this is going. Like, the most perfect obedient little sheep one could ask for. First they offer it as optional, then as adoption increases it becomes the only thing they support. It is already the case that some services can't be accessed without a duopoly phone, and in 10 years time it will become standard policy.
            • Grombobulous2 hours ago
              Can we stop with the edgelord “little sheep” stuff?

              Not everything is a slippery slope. What you are doing is editorializing and making assumptions about the future. Show me a piece of proposed legislation that wants to ban physical ID cards and mandate digital ones then we’ll talk.

              I interpret this as the government offering a convenience feature.

              • anonymous9082132 hours ago
                > Show me a piece of proposed legislation that wants to ban physical ID cards and mandate digital ones then we’ll talk.

                "Wait until it's too late and then I'll acknowledge reality"

                They don't even need legislation to accomplish this. It is literally already happening that some government services are not accessible without those phones. You are being presented with a fait accompli and closing your eyes to it because you think words on paper mean anything.

                • Grombobulous2 hours ago
                  Which services are inaccessible? List them out.

                  Sure, yeah, I need the App Store to access the Tolls NY EZ Pass app. But I don’t need the EZ Pass app to manage my account or pay a toll, and I don’t even need EZ Pass itself to pay a toll. This government service is an optional convenience.

                  Again with slippery slope doomer mentality we can list out any future hypothetical and apply this “wake up” messaging.

                  The state makes me get a drivers license to drive a car, wake up sheeple, pretty soon they’re going to make you get a license to walk down the sidewalk. Just because it hasn’t happened yet and there’s no pending legislation or political appetite for that idea doesn’t mean we are safe, we have to fight this now before it’s too late!

                  • anonymous9082132 hours ago
                    We've been sliding down the privacy slope for my entire life. Literally every single year is worse than the one before it. At what point does one engage their brain and realize that incessantly repeating "slippery slope! slippery slope fallacy!" does not, in fact, stop them from sliding down the slope? It's not a fucking fallacy when you're on one.

                    > Which services are inaccessible?

                    I'm aware of a handful of French services based on France's already existing, Google/Apple required national identity service. Strictly speaking EUDI isn't live until 2027, but there is not a single reason to believe it will end in any other result. Even if you've drank from the spring of eternal naivety, surely there must be a limit to how much good faith you can have in how much your government values your privacy? Maybe you could point me to the source of this blissful ability to close your eyes and ignore everything happening around you?

                    • Grombobulous2 hours ago
                      Now we are heading into a completely different topic. We were talking about the availability of government services, not privacy.

                      You have not listed a specific French service. I suspect if you did I’d then be able to look it up and find out that there’s a non-digital alternative available, and that putting stuff on the App Store and Google Play is just the government meeting their constituents where they are.

                      Despite your accusations, I’m not naive about governments that want to clamp down on their citizens’ privacy and freedoms, but at the same time I don’t really think the more mundane government services tend to work this way. I think they’re choosing the technology available to them out of pragmatism. They need to put their services on something that is widely adopted and meets their technical needs. E.g., if the government wants to take payments for vehicle registrations with a credit card, there is no real way around going through Visa/Mastercard. It’s not like they’re doing that as some kind of conspiracy theory anti-privacy scheme.

                      • anonymous908213an hour ago
                        > We were talking about the availability of government services, not privacy.

                        Sure. The government services are available to you if you get your nice little American phone and give them your data and aren't sanctioned.

                        https://www.moncompteformation.gouv.fr/espace-public/je-ne-r...

                        Yeah, yeah, there's a non-digital alternative available. Just wait an additional four weeks like a second-class citizen. That's totally a reasonable thing to make anyone do and not de facto requiring a duopoly device.

                        > I think they’re choosing the technology available to them out of pragmatism.

                        Does this distinction matter? I didn't make any kind of accusations of conspiracy theories. Convenience is enough. Depending on the US duopoly is more convenient than either digital sovereignty or privacy, so you get neither of those things.

                        The EUDI already compromised its idealistic words on paper. It was meant to be platform agnostic. That died the moment it came time to implement it, because it was more convenient to only support Apple/Google phones. And when the majority of citizens are using it, it becomes more convenient to support only it rather than offering multiple alternatives. Thus, without any malice aforethought, your entire union becomes dependent on and subservient to the US, and the legislation mandating businesses support EUDI is, even if unintentionally, a killing blow to any attempt to escape the status quo. The purpose of a system is what it does[1].

                        [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

                        • Grombobulousan hour ago
                          As I suspected, you named the service and it turns out the service has completely reasonable alternatives and/or has very good reasons to require higher security requirements.

                          First off, waiting up to 4 weeks for these services is not some form of second class citizenry. If my passport application process took 4 weeks in the USA I would be ecstatic.

                          Second, FranceConnect+ requires higher identity verification, and this higher level of verification is only used for a small subset of specific government services in France, such as the vocational training program, where French citizens can have training paid for by the government. It's very understandable that you'd need higher level identity verification for that to reduce fraud.

                          Unlike your assertion, there is actually a PC-based identity verification alternative for at least some of the underlying services where you use a webcam, identity number, and ID documents, and then there's also the physical mail option. FranceConnect+ is akin to a single sign on style service to access some of those underlying services with more convenience. Being unable to access FranceConnect+ is not inability to access those services.

                          FranceConnect+ is only used for 9 services compared to the total 1,800 services offered in FranceConnect:

                          - Vocational training (CPF)

                          - Company creation and filings (INPI)

                          - Applying for energy renovation grant (ANAH)

                          - Hospital patient data (AP-HP portal)

                          - Online passport renewal (again, we do this in the US by mail and it takes 4+ weeks)

                          - Qualified registered letters (AR24)

                          - National pharmaceutical records (eIDAS)

                          - Signature/trust service (eIDAS)

                          - eIDAS interoperability service

              • 2 hours ago
                undefined
        • chrisjjan hour ago
          > I understand the truth is upsetting

          To you, for sure.

          Your quote fails to corroborate your claim.

        • summm2 hours ago
          yeah this is a bullshit excuse:

          > The national EUDI Wallet does not need an account/login.

          This is a straight lie.

          > Users can use the wallet without creating any account/login. Independently of this, the App Store and Google Play Store require an account for the user to install any application.

          This is not "independent". Their security architecture depends on this.

          > We are aware that some users prefer alternative distribution methods. These are being looked into. Any such approach must meet the required security standards and must not compromise the integrity of the EUDI Wallet.

          Their whole botched security architecture relies on remote attestation using Google Play Integrity and the Apple equivalent. And they lie straight in our face.

          Of course the whole regulation was at least in Germany supported and influenced by people in a pseudo public research institute who then immediately founded the spin-off for-profit startup which got awarded the app development. It is unclear to me how deep that appearance of corruption goes, what part of the EU is in on it, and what part is just too naive.

      • eastbound2 hours ago
        Europe will really have to set up Chat Control, and for cause: Making hostile ethnies from Africa live together in Europe will require tremendous forces, but certainly not democratic ones. Anti-muslim bollards on our avenues and in front of schools are only the beginning, along with policemen at each mall and each cultural event — if it succeeds, this project will be the craziest endeavour of humanity.

        But it will be costly.

  • 2 hours ago
    undefined
  • antinode2 hours ago
    [flagged]
  • netdur2 hours ago
    europe has had a free ride at the rest of the world's expense, whether through security provided by the us, resources stolen from africa, or cheap energy from russia, when others don't give europeans what they want, they complain, and that's about it, replacing starlink? good luck
  • DataDive2 hours ago
    The only problem of course it is that it costs a lot of money to do so.

    Money they probably don't have.

    • mordae2 hours ago
      Are you saying EU with its 450M people is lacking "money" and needs 350M US to do it for us? Because somehow "money" is what makes stuff to happen. Not labor.
      • mkagenius2 hours ago
        > Because somehow "money" is what makes stuff to happen. Not labor.

        With us 1.5B Indians, we can concur money is a big factor if not the biggest.

      • verdverm2 hours ago
        Europes slice of global GDP has gone from ~30% (1980's) to ~17% (2020's), America's has remained at ~25%, and China has been on the rise, tbd if they can pass the US

        Population wise, 7%, 5%, and 16%

        Another statistic, the EU accounts for almost 50% of global social spending.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMjDmYqykNI (Stephen Kotkin - World on Fire?) (There are more than 100 armed conflicts going on right now, the most since the 1940s)

      • bagacrap2 hours ago
        I mean I hear people clamoring for a paycheck without work. I've never heard someone ask to work without a paycheck. So yes money seems like an important ingredient.
  • javier1234543212 hours ago
    https://worksinprogress.co/issue/why-europe-doesnt-have-a-te...

    Reminds me of this article. Everyone knows that Europeans could compete, and the world stage would welcome it, but they have put themselves into a bind where taking back any social service or loosening regulation and allowing markets to operate would take their air of superiority over stupid Americans and they would rather kill off any chance at becoming world technology players than that. Also it is just political and cultural suicide, ask Paris right now.

    • Geezus_422 hours ago
      So if they don't let corporations trample all over people then their society will obviously collapse?
      • AlecSchueler2 hours ago
        It's genuinely disturbing to see how many here apparently favour GDP over human development indices and quality of life metrics.
        • bagacrap2 hours ago
          Who expressed favoritism? This is just a description of life as it is. I suspect that most people will favor whatever society they were raised in, and many who don't will move. Silicon valley is full of immigrants, who apparently hate life?
          • AlecSchueler2 hours ago
            The above said that the markets in Europe don't operate. A sibling post refers to Europe as the laughing stock of the world. Multiple people are saying it would be impossible for Europe to build alternatives to foreign services because they have consumer protections.

            Europe is full of immigrants too, are they all rushing to live in a stagnant society on the verge of collapse, knowing their families abroad are just laughing in astonishment at their decisions?

            I'm not sure it comes down to where you were raised. I was in a car with a Texan and a Californian at the weekend, driving up to Amsterdam, and they were laughing all the way about how safe the roads were, how friendly the police were and how considerate the other drivers were. Like, "they actually tell you where the speed traps are!? The cops aren't out to get me!?"

            • bagacrap2 hours ago
              Well, on this website you are being exposed to people who didn't choose to be in Amsterdam.
    • gmueckl2 hours ago
      No, this article gets its core premise wrong: labor laws are not the main issue. The issue is that if I wanted to found a new company, I'd be confronted with lots very strict regulations with lots of implications and induced overhead. The list is too long for a HN comment.

      It's not impossible to overcome, but it is an added commitment for any new company. Founding is not very attractive and that's why we don't get that many crazy wild bets here (Tesla was one initially too).

      • bagacrap2 hours ago
        Are labor laws not a regulation?

        I will accept your argument that there are additional onerous regulations on top of that. But that seems like the same "core premise".

        • gmueckl2 hours ago
          No, labor laws are fine exactly as they are. Not importing US style at will hire and fire culture is an asset. That's all budgetable and relatively minor. If you are seeing a need to downsize your company early on, the fundamental mistakes already happened way earlier by choosing a path that was unsustainable. Such a company doesn't usually have a future.
      • ErroneousBoshan hour ago
        > The issue is that if I wanted to found a new company, I'd be confronted with lots very strict regulations with lots of implications and induced overhead

        Yes, like for example you have to actually pay your employees for the time they work, and give them a certain amount of paid annual leave

        This is something anathemic to USian companies, who see skilled workers as essentially disposable single-use devices.

    • andix2 hours ago
      Let's just assume your claim is true, and it is impossible to build software in Europe.

      European companies can still build software in different countries. Nothing stops them from building their software in an US subsidiary they fully control. A lot of good software developers are currently looking for a job.

      • ivan_gammel2 hours ago
        Nobody is going to build any software in US when nearshore is 2-3 times cheaper. American engineers are overpriced and not competitive on the global market.
        • phoghed36 minutes ago
          If you want dirt cheap contractors who largely accomplish nothing, the US is indeed the wrong place.
    • bagacrap2 hours ago
      > Relative to income, it costs large companies four times more to lay off Germans and French than American workers

      Yep, so saying Europe can build software is pretty much like Western factories trying to compete with slave or child labor in some developing part of the world.

      I mean most Americans probably don't want to open their own sweatshop garment factories. But it does mean that if we start ww3 that shirts may be harder to come by. I think it's probably a good thing that the entire world is too interdependent to want to start shooting at each other? (G10 at least)

      • ivan_gammel2 hours ago
        Cost of layoff is wrong measure of competitiveness, to start with.
    • Zigurd2 hours ago
      I would call this theory "No tech leadership without enshitification."

      Or maybe, just hear me out, that's an American delusion, promoted to justify the oligarchy here.

      • bagacrap2 hours ago
        Well we don't really have a counterexample yet
  • someoneherean hour ago
    "the U.S. is an unreliable security and technology partner willing to throw any partner under the bus, at any time, for any reason."

    This isn't new. The US has been doing this for decades.

    • yreadan hour ago
      Indeed. Ukrainians should have talked to the Kurds before relying on the US
    • FlyingSnakean hour ago
      “It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.”
  • notenchange2 hours ago
    It might have given a reason, but it’s not like that will actually create anything in Europe.

    The only thing they can do these days is imposing new regulations of bottle caps. They turned themselves into the laughing stock of the all world: willingly.

    • AlecSchueler2 hours ago
      Sure looks a lot better than the US or China or really where else though, doesn't it?
    • mschuster912 hours ago
      > It might have given a reason, but it’s not like that will actually create anything in Europe.

      Oh we absolutely are building replacement stuff for a lot of American things. IRIS2 for example is our Starlink alternative. OVH, Hetzner and a bunch of other smaller players can provide hosting. Mistral is our AI model. Cars, trucks and farm equipment can be/are made in Europe. We have our own nuclear weapons, warplanes, navy, tanks, satellite based surveillance, and sooner rather than later (via Ukraine) viable replacements even for missile defense. That is the last thing we truly are depending on the US, but eh, after Trump wasted the entire US stockpile on the Iran clustercuck they again left us no choice, and the Ukrainians are busy by necessity developing something useful.

      A lot of the major players in software are Europe-based too. SuSE, GnuPG, KDE, LibreOffice and I think also Samba are German. VLC is French. MariaDB is at least partially based in Finland. Spotify is Swedish.

      The only thing we do lack is a fully integrated hardware and software manufacturer similar to Apple, but I think we could set up something based off of the open source parts of Framework and Raspberry Pi should the need arise.

      > The only thing they can do these days is imposing new regulations of bottle caps.

      Have you walked alongside the Isar river at least once in your life? I personally am happy to no longer see plastic bottle caps littered around, and the magnetic ones can be picked up easy enough with a magnet. I don't see the problem.

      > They turned themselves into the laughing stock of the all world: willingly.

      The laughing stock of the world is the US President who regularly shits himself in his diapers.