> In 2024, Google ran a set of tests of user interest in news content in Denmark and several other countries, concluding that removing such content had “no measurable impact” on search ad revenue. Those findings — along with the testing itself — have come under harsh criticism from Danish lawmakers.
I'm not really sure what Denmark is complaining about? It sounds like Google decided that removing Danish media and news from their services would have no impact on their finances whatsoever, therefore they are firm on their negotiating position since it's basically "take it or leave it".
And Denmark is also somehow trying to force Google to list and index their media, and at their price.
Because "business" isn't just "business" in Denmark and many other countries. Journalism for example, isn't just about the financial bottom-line, journalism has a societal role, and also the move could be seen as trying to avoid paying publishers under EU rules designed to support a free press.
I think a lot of friction between businesses and countries in Europe can be better understood if we better understood the difference in how countries treat things like "business" and other stuff. I understand in the US it's different, money basically rules, you can fire people whenever you want and so on, but in many places in the world, people have a different relationship to businesses, it's not just about money there.
Particularly when it comes to journalism. From reading news from Denmark about it, politicians been repeatedly argued that Google's framing reduces journalism to a revenue input, ignoring its democratic function.
If journalism really weren't just about the financial bottom line in Denmark, then why are they quibbling over what Google will pay them at all? It sounds like they'll be happy with just Google listing and driving traffic to their content for free.
You're missing the point. I speak American so I can translate. He's basically saying journalism is a matter of National Security. It needs to be done correctly to a high level at all costs, much like education. Google (Silicon Valley) is messing with it.
National security could be a valid concern. But Danish media leveraging DK gov't to rollback the reality could never be a success story. Those media are failing not because they are not in the US. Established American media have the same troubles and complains.
I think it's ok if the highly productive parts of society subsidize the crucial-but-low-productivity areas (healthcare, education, etc).
Otherwise this happens https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/te... See all the important careers on the bottom right of the first graph. Then your people elect fascists because the media and education systems suck and they don't know any better.
Why is it the responsibility of American tech companies to subsidize Danish news and media industries? If it's really that important for national security, shouldn't the Danish government be setting up some kind of a state journalism fund to subsidize it themselves?
> Denmark isn’t just resisting U.S. tech; it is one of the few nations actively building its own sovereign alternatives for critical infrastructure.
> In Rogaczewski’s view, sovereign digitization is not just a defensive measure against Silicon Valley; it is the only way to maintain the welfare state in the 21st century.
If it's a matter of national security and compromise isn't possible, I'd encourage Denmark to seek or create alternatives; it's the best they can hope for. Denmark has no obligation to deal with Google and Google has no obligation to deal with Denmark, regardless of the impact those choices have on the other party.
If regulations can legitimately be advocated for, they can be advocated against as well.
Facebook wouldn’t have any vested interest in the far left, the far right, the far up or the far down in the EU if the EU wasn’t giving them reasons to take an interest. If the parties in power were really worried that Facebook was going to be the difference-maker, they could undercut the opposition and remove the issue entirely by rolling back their needless regulations and keeping their own desire to overstep their authority and dictate terms to foreign enterprises in check.
Right. You must be referring to the libel laws that have specific exemptions for politically powerful or otherwise publicly prominent individuals specifically to avoid intrusion into freedom of the press. And you think that helps your point?
Hmm, they're not 'messing with' journalism or national security. They just don't care enough to index denmark journalism. I'm also not sure how denmark can strongarm google et. al. into doing anything at all. Is this incorrect, is there some sort of path forward here for denmark to get what they want?
But Google is willing to host their content in search, right?
They're just not willing to pay since there's no revenue benefit to search hosting it. It seems like Danish media doesn't like this and has chosen to withhold their content, which is their right of course, but it seems strange to contort that into a claim that Google is doing censorship.
> In practice, that's a form of censorship since it inhibits the ability of people in Denmark to discover domestic news articles through search.
No it doesn't. It it inhibits the ability of people in Denmark to discover domestic news articles through GOOGLE search. A subtle but hugely distinct difference, making your point quite moot.
In this context "journalism" usually refers not to a crowd of Mothers Teresas seeking to improve society in voluntary contradiction to their own market (or guild/class/whatever) interests, but a bunch of business entities which were born out of printed newspapers, feeling uncertain about their revenues after changes in technology of information delivery ruined their niche. And trying to leverage their established relations with politicians to extract more profit. It's not like Google is offending little pixies here. After all, there are youtube channels which have a societal role too, and search engines too I guess can make a similar claim.
Other commenter's note about national security issue is more on point but then I doubt that bailing out failing news platforms would make them as influential as they used to be in the bygone era.
This does not support freedom of the press. This policy is essentially a tax on web indexers (in practice, Google) that is paid directly to the news companies. This means that they are entirely dependent on government authority for their revenue, which is the opposite of freedom of the press. On top of that, only companies that are defined as "news outlets" by the government are eligible for forced indexing and payment. So not only is the government setting itself up as the revenue source, but it gets to choose who gets the money.
lol only on this forum can you construe the government regulating big tech as an anti freedom stance.
Google, Meta, Apple, and Amazon are society destroying companies. They are Walmart times a trillion. Any country that is not directly taxing these wildly profitable companies are leaving free money on the table.
You are hiding behind the word "regulating" which is meaningless by itself instead of talking about the particular regulation in question. This is a regulation that the tech companies pay money directly to a list of media companies picked by the government. It is absolutely an anti freedom stance.
No, you're just decrying any government intervention as bad which is moronic. The only solace I can take is that a large majority of US voters despise big tech and tech workers. Go out and do some canvassing, I have across the country and the sentiment is quite clear.
Whoever is the first President to decapitate a tech company will likely be put on Mount Rushmore as a hero of the people.
Get out of your bubble because the upcoming change is going to give you whiplash.
Just like they hate oil companies. But that doesn't stop them from pulling up to the gas station, or enjoying any of the other thousands of goods and services dependent on oil. They even go out an buy massive inefficient cars and spend multiples of what they need to. And despite all the supposed hatred, no politician dares to mess with the oil industry because at the end of the day they know nothing will get the voters out for blood against them quite like rising gas prices.
They hate the tech industry you say? They want you to "decapitate" a tech company you say? Americans love two things above all else, convenience and complaining. Go ahead, take away their overnight Amazon deliveries, Google searches, smartphones, Instagram, and Tiktok, and see where that gets you.
The criticism was that Google have a dominant position on search market, Google selected 1% of their users to run the experiment on, but without informing them. That is users didn’t know that their search results were manipulated and articles they would otherwise have found didn’t show up.
So the argument presented by Danish authorities and media companies were that information should flow freely in a democracy and by doing a huge experiment like this without informing users is against the rights of Danish citizens.
"Manipulated" is a loaded and meaningless term here. All results are generated by algorithm, so that means 99% see the output of algorithm A and 1% see the output of algorithm B. Neither is more "manipulated" than the other.
It is possible that neither are more manipuled tough it's impossible to tell. What seems clear from your example above is that both are manipulated, just in different ways and with google's incentive. It is understandable that countries came to the conclusion that this is posing a threat to their national security.
"Manipulated" has strong negative connotations, but it could just mean that the results are chosen and controlled by the search engine. In which case, it's a meaningless statement. The entire purpose of any search engine is to choose results for queries.
Or it can mean the results were altered from some ideal baseline algorithm that we consider unmanipulated. The only obvious candidate for this baseline would be the search engine's regular algorithm. But if you're saying that's not the baseline, then it's unclear what you consider to be the true baseline and therefore unclear what "manipulated" means.
I agree that countries may consider search engines, social media, or anything else that can affect flow of information to be a national security threat.
And what, exactly, is the national security threat here? If Google is manipulating results to favor its advertisers or the political positions of its owners, that's what all publishers do, and have always done and nobody ever called it a national security threat. The "national security threat" here seems to be that they are showing people content that the government doesn't want them to see.
I’ve been part of multiple clinical trials and consent was always there. The control group exists. They know they’re in the study but they may not know they’re the control group.
I'm not commenting on the ethics of A/B testing without informing the customer.
Maybe I misunderstood the comment I was replying to. If they meant that the experiment's results were probably valid but conducting the experiment was unethical, then my response was unnecessary.
First it is not manipulation please read the terms of service and user consent on this issue. Second this is standard practice A/B testing is universal and companies do a holdout experiment all the time it is also called Withholding test.
It sounds to me like Denmark's media and news isn't very valuable from an ad sales perspective. So Google has set their price reflecting what they think that value is: not much. And Denmark is now getting their lawmakers involved because they think it's worth a lot more and they want to force Google to buy it for a lot more.
Honestly, it doesn't sound like a lot of these EU countries are interested in digital sovereignty or developing their own services. They just want to force the American companies to sell their services at rates favorable to them by getting their regulators involved.
Yeah it seems like if they were really struggling to break up then they wouldn't be trying to force Google or Meta to the negotiating table. They would be simply kicking them out and not utilizing their services at all.
But it's actually the opposite. They are trying to get their lawmakers to force Google and Meta to provide them their services at below market value!
It seems like Google and Meta are using their dominant position to take as big a part of ad revenue as they possibly can, and if that means independent news companies where actual journalism is conducted can’t survive, then they don’t really care.
Danish media are trying to survive, as high quality journalism is necessary for democracy to function. They can’t avoid being on the big platforms, as Google and Meta have this dominant gatekeeper position in the market - this is where the media pull new users into their sites.
People who are capable of building things don't go into government. "Bureaucracy" has a connotation of where creativity and innovation goes to die for a reason. The personality type that goes into bureaucracy thinks about this like "why would I put in the effort to build something when I could just use the state monopoly on violence to shake down the suckers who already did all that hard work for me?" Of course they lie to the public, and most importantly to themselves, that they have higher motives, but that is the underlying logic.
The Dutch national government mandated login system relies on technologies and hosting of a private company that was in conversation with an American counterpart about a possible acquisition.
> The publishers say that their industry is bleeding out while they wait for a deal that may never come.
If your industry cannot sustain itself without checks from tech companies for using content as LLM training data that is quite a precarious situation. What was the economic situation for the news industry in Denmark prior to 2021?
And they created a powerful cartel which can pressure politicians to benefit the cartel:
The Danish Press Collective Management Organization (DPCMO), formed in 2021, now represents what CEO Karen Rønde calls a “99 percent mandate” of the entire industry.
I've said it before - about MS. But if you move enough Danes off American IT the rest will follow, I think once you have a 30-40 percent move then within less than a year a landslide, maybe quicker as it is now tied up with patriotism.
Doesn't really doesn't matter what it cost to do. You should still do it. Of course, within reason, there may be some software that it's just intractable to reproduce.
US tech companies are taking up middlemen roles to extract wealth from developed nations, while not adding a lot of value on their own. Their moat is not that big, and there are mature viable alternatives.
One does not need google in their lives to be exposed to advertisements to a local brand. Or pay a percentage fee to paypal or visa if you buy a local product.
US tech companies lose much more from a decoupling than Europe does.
If they are not adding any value, then the content companies can decline to be indexed. They have always had that right, but they do not exercise it which is a clear signal that indexing adds value. So they are getting a service that adds value for free, and not only are they not grateful for that, they are actually so greedy that they want Google to pay them.
It depends on more than just that. Mindshare, network effects, and the state of a technological art all matter.
The moat crossing isn't in competing with the likes of Google or Paypal directly. The moat crossing is in accumulating enough capital to build the thing that leapfrogs them. Being a middleman allows you to accumulate a lot of money while expending fairly little of it. Then, you focus on the next thing, be it AI or whatever, while collecting middleman fees.
This has a collective effect on a nation's economy. You could tell the American companies to go kick rocks and develop your own local alternatives, but then you're expending your capital on developing a local alternative, not developing the Next Big Thing (TM), and the Americans are. The risk is that your economy becomes less competitive overall while becoming more competitive with one segment of the American economy.
On the other hand, you can’t develop a technology if you have no knowledge of its inner workings.
This is an issue the US finds itself in now as it tries to onshore manufacturing again after allowing someone else to play middle man for decades.
Yes, the US has plenty of capital resources but that doesn’t directly translate into production when you have to setup not just a single factory but an entire supply chain.
Arguments in favor of US politics which are based on "mature markets" and "capital" have become extremely weak since they started dismantling Fed autonomy and used ChatGPT to roll the dice on random tariffs.
It doesn't help that the clever talking heads behind US "capital" such as Peter Thiel, Elon Musk and David Sacks have outed themselves as complete and utter morons.
Denmark is not alone here and it is also not just due to Trump
threatening to enslave all Greenlanders by military junta force either. That is just part of the military complex being tied to "business" - and happened in the past too, by the way. Trump just makes it "more official".
The whole TechBro mafia structure behind Trump has again and again
threatened damage against Europeans. A good example was Vance trolling
on the security conference in Munich, where he complained how the ultra
right are silenced in Europe. This showed that the new agenda that the
TechBros in the USA do, is actively hostile - this in addition to Trump
acting as agent Krasnov buddy for Putin. So, any more money that goes
into the USA, is ultimately money that goes against Europe. In many ways
Canadians understand this problem MUCH better than many governments in
Europe - just look at the german government. They are absolutely unwilling
to stop being so obedient to the USA. Denmark at the least understands the
problem - why is Germany so strange?
idk, If I was in control of a country in the EU I would realize, unfortunately for pretty much everyone on the planet, that we have made a drastic miscalculation by relying on the US so heavily for defense.
However, that is not something that can be reversed meaningfully in less than a decade. So for now, I would play the long game like Germany while working to get the EU to build up a military force large enough to significantly reduce our dependence on the US.
It's not as if the US hasn't repeatedly requested that European nations invest in their defense for the past few decades.
Looking at it dispassionately as a European living in the US, if you wanted to foment the sort of mistrust many Americans have of Europe, I don't think you could have created a more invidious policy.
It can be reversed in a year. In 1941 the US increased its production of tanks by 7x. In 1942 it increased production again by 4x. This idea that building industry takes decades needs to die a painful death.
There's a certain large European country with plenty of resources that is pretty famous for scaling its tank production just a couple years before the US did.
Its because you people still keep blaming 'external factors' for homegrown problems that you have those problems. Both Trump and the forces behind Trump have been there long before any current head of state around the world entered politics for the first time.
> just look at the german government. They are absolutely unwilling to stop being so obedient to the USA. Denmark at the least understands the problem - why is Germany so strange?
Denmark doesnt 'understand' anything either - it agreed to set up a 'working group' for Greenland, which basically means they agreed to give Trump what he wants. The island may nominally remain in Danish ownership, but it will likely be effectively controlled by the US.
i would take a 50% pay cut (FAANG) to move to denmark (with an accelerated path to perm residency) to work on whatever thing they want. any takers? actually any EU nation...
Edit: with all of the negativity under this comment I'm reminded of a hilarious experience I had when I first interned at FB during grad school: I was on some online game with a friend of mine and his friend (whom I'd never met) and we were on voice chat. My buddy asks me how the internship is going and I gave the standard "it's hard but I'm learning a lot" response. Afterwards the third guy chimes in and asks if me I don't feel ashamed (or whatever) about working for FB. It was literally my first tech internship so I said something equivocal. Then I asked the guy what he did/where he worked. I shit you not the guy was literally a radar engineer for the US army. The irony was clearly lost on him and he even went as far as insisting he (as opposed to me) was doing very good/valuable work.
How about instead of taking the easy way out and preserving your wealth you stay in the US and take up your generational responsibility and figure out how to fix the situation that you and your fellow citizens have created?
Same feeling from me. I also disliked his framing of moving his FAANG wealth to outcompete EU workers on jobs and housing, then making it sound like he's doing Europeans a favor with this.
"Yeah guys, I got enough blood money now from ad targeting people in the US, so to clear my conscience I can come give you guys a hand to fight the evil guys I had no issue with when they were paying me big money, but only IF you pay me 50% of what they pay me."
How about thanks but no thanks. We don't need this kind of fake virtue signaling "help". Enjoy your money somewhere else.
The fact that the US didn't take your attitude and allowed workers from all over the world to come to Silicon Valley and compete with Americans for jobs and housing ("compete for housing" being the most ridiculous concept I have ever heard of) is one of the many reasons why SV is in the US and not in Europe.
>"compete for housing" being the most ridiculous concept I have ever heard of
How can I have a productive discussion with someone who doesn't know or refuses to acknowledge the reality of housing supply/demand and resulting gentrification?
Gee, if only there was a city in the world that's a big tech hub and we could study the effects on its housing market and citizen who don't work in tech and how they're impacted.
>is one of t many reasons why SV is in the US and not in Europe
I've been to SF and I'm not sure I want the issues I saw there over here.
And to correct you, SV is what it is due to the WW2 and cold war military electronics industry rooted in government spending brewing there instead of being bombed to the ground like Europe, plus the financial engineering leavers of the US FED being able to print virtually gold and use that virtual gold to buy everything they ever need to win including foreign competitors and suppliers while offloading the resulting inflation burden onto the rest of the world, or use trade restrictions and military force as the second option to block any potential rising competitors that threaten the existing hegemony.
SV is in the US because of heavy government spending to further national interests. And US intelligence community was one of the first to realize that total domination of home computers / smartphones / social media allows them to exert a lot of power.
SV took workers from all over the world because these workers were extremely skilled and cheap. They didn't compete with Americans for jobs because there were simply not enough Americans with the needed skills.
Foreign tech workers need housing but they don't own land and can't vote in your elections, so the fact housing is bad is 100% on US citizens.
2. There are plenty of Americans with the skills. I know because I went from never having written any code or having any technical education to full time employment in SV in under a year.
3. Housing issues are 100% the fault of the local US citizens and their idiotic policies, but immigrant tech workers absolutely do own land and I know several who do. Plenty of them vote because they are now citizens.
- Are zoning laws affecting only immigrant born population from buying, or simply everyone moving to SF for work?
- If the locals are preventing the foreigners to buy housing via zoning laws, then how did those immigrants manage to buy housing like you said?
- And once immigrants become citizens and homeowners, are you saying they don't vote for the same zoning laws that protect their housing investment just like the natives?
That's where your contradictions are, and this is my last response you get on this discussion, since it's clearly not going anywhere.
Let me spell it out for you. This is 100% a stupid regulation issue and has fuck all to do with immigration. If the US had a more restrictive immigration policy the same thing would have happened because so many native born Americans (including myself) moved to SV for high paying jobs. Supply and demand is what it is whether that demand comes from a US citizen or an immigrant.
lol where are you getting all this from? first of all there are 3 letters in FAANG which don't do ads, second of all i didn't express anywhere that i felt i was doing anyone any favors, third of all are you aware that US citizens are double taxed no matter where they live, where they earn their money, fourth of all are you aware there's an exit tax on your total net worth if you renounce citizenship?
y'all are extra spicy on this topic seemingly.
EDIT:
> We don't need this kind of fake virtue signaling "help"
i wasn't virtue signalling anything - that's why i said money is still an important part of the calculus. i was literally just curious if there were such accelerated pathways for SWEs...
> there are 3 letters in FAANG which don't do ads,
FAANG is Facebook(Meta), Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google(Alphabet) right?
Facebook and Google are heavy on ads, Amazon has ads all over their shopping experience and in their video product; AWS isn't connected with ads though, Netflix has an ads tier in their video product too, I opted out of Apple so I don't know what ads look like on their products but I think they have a small ads product?
I'm not quite sure why the negative responses to your offer though. Sure, it's a bit mercenary, but it's an offer. Personally, I don't think it's really about personnel though, recruiting FAANG employees to Europe wouldn't generate European FAANGs; Europe needs to look at the business conditions that spawn these kinds of companies and see what they can change to encourage the kinds of companies they want. Why did Apple survive while early computer companies from Europe all folded and also where have all the European handset makers gone; where are the online megaretailers for Europe and why didn't they consider selling their surplus computing resources; why haven't Euro television companies developed a cross border streaming service; maybe something about search engines, maybe what stopped Europe from playing in the search engine wars before Google became dominant; bonus non faang question, why did Europay merge with Mastercard.
> recruiting FAANG employees to Europe wouldn't generate European FAANGs
Yep, this. We already have enough local FANG level talent, talent is not the problem in Europe.
What we don't have is:
1) the printing press of the world reserve currency so that VCs backed by our central bank can keep spending the fake money we print on tech gambles while the rest of world absorbs our inflation as if it were gold, and
2) the world's biggest military to nudge (enforce) our products and services on the rest of the world to ensure our hegemony
Until you fix both these point, or at least point 2 and kick out the US military and companies from our continent, like China did, you can't have a domestic SV that challenges the one from the US no matter how much good talent you have.
And we can't do that since we can't even kick Russia's ass right now after 4 years, let alone stand up to the US hegemony and enforce our will over them, so we'll continue to be dependent on them.
I don't agree with these bitter Europeans at all, but offering to take a 50% pay cut does come off very much like you are trying to do someone a favor.
Calling people "bitter" doesn't win an argument. I think US tech workers get quite emotional once they feel the slightest headwind that threatens to burst their bubble.
I call you bitter because bitterness is dripping from your comments:
> How about instead of taking the easy way out and preserving your wealth you stay in the US and take up your generational responsibility and figure out how to fix the situation that you and your fellow citizens have created?
This feels even more bitter than if you had written "I am bitter over the success of the US tech industry."
I think the point is more that 50% of senior FAANG total comp is still a lot more than you get at most European places.
100-120k net is considered quite a good salary and is unattainable even for most as a contracted employee. You do get benefits like healthcare and pensions which work differently. You can get higher rates if you are good at marketing, but then you need to insure your unemployment and pension yourself as well.
My latest info on Silicon Valley compensation (Google, Netflix, and Twitter) was that 400k/year gross before tax and RSU was typically achievable with even higher regular occurrences. 50% of that is still way over what you typically find here. (Switzerland excluded but all prices are inflated in Switzerland.)
In the US you have to privately pay for many things that you get for free in more developed nations.
For example safety is not guaranteed due to extreme homelessness and easy access to guns, so you have to pay more for gated communities and security/concierge. You need to privately pay for healthcare and also pay off debt from university tuition, both is much cheaper in EU. If you have kids, you have to pay for private schools.
Then all over the US the infrastructure is so extremely bad that you don't even have sidewalks and you need to take a car to get anywhere, with really bad public transport.
If you want to just emulate European lifestyle in the US you really need to spend a lot of money.
>If you want to just emulate European lifestyle in the US you really need to spend a lot of money.
Even a lot of Europeans today are not having the envied European lifestyle right now. Things are getting worse here too, so you also need to spend out of pocket and have a very good paying job, just to get the European lifestyle that was the norm 10+ years ago with an average job.
And it's only gonna get downhill from here with the increase in defense spending that's gotta come from somewhere, the stagnating economy and increasing CoL, the ballooning retirement and welfare timebomb, etc.
If you make 50% of US FANG wages, then you'll probably be fine, but most people don't.
And there's a lot of places in the US (excluding the major cities) that don't have those issues you mentioned and where you can live a pretty chill and safe lifestyle too if you're a skilled worker on a decent income, similar how there's cities in Europe that have a lot of poverty, crime and failing infrastructure as well where you need a good job and skills to get out. It's not as binary as you try to make it be.
<rolls eyes> alright i'm totally responsible for the trumpocalypse because somewhere someone in my company is running some kind of ads service </rolls eyes>.
> then posturing like a anti-FANG freedom fighter for 50% cut, which might rub some people the wrong way as being a by hypocritica
The only place I was posturing was in your imagination. I guess you're salty about FAANG salaries in the US (and that's what has you tilted) but I was literally just asking about comparable salary and accelerated immigration pathways. The comment is very short - I don't know where you're getting all of this content from.
People don't like how you both virtue signal and show ignorance at the same time.
It's not about "someone in my company is running some kind of ads service" but that you and your colleagues collectively have had a net negative impact on free societies all over the world.
Nobody is jealous about FAANG salaries if you need to step over unconscious homeless people on your way to work, fear about healthcare, university tuition and that your kid might be shot at school.
Nobody said you're responsible for ads, but people have an issue with you accepting to take the big FANG money which you knew comes from ads and other nefarious monopolistic anti consumer things FANGs do, and then wanting to be a anti-FANG freedom fighter but only if you can maintain 50% of FANG money, which might rub some people the wrong way as being a by hypocritical.
So you're trying to say that taking a flight is some sort sacrifice?
Most of the people I know have lived in at least one other country for several months, while most of US citizens not once in their life have left the USA and don't even own a passport.
It's not generational responsibility. Everyone has at least some responsibility to defend the democratic values, traditions, and nation that have enabled them to live freely and peacefully.
For someone who has greatly benefited from the opportunities the nation afforded them, it's insulting for such a person to behave as if they possess no responsibility to defend the values, tradition, and nation that enabled them to succeed.
It's hard for me to escape how strongly I feel about this. As a European, I don't wish for such sorts of people to immigrate here. They can go back.
The average person has almost no way of making any serious impact on society, especially in this time period. Besides that, the US was founded by people taking "the easy way out" and leaving another country, so it's only fitting.
Though the commenter mentioned working at a FAANG, so maybe they're far more culpable in this situation than the average person. If that's the case, I'd have to agree with you.
We are responsible for your nation's failure to be competitive in this industry? There are many European companies that operate freely in the US, so it is not our laws that are getting in your way. The only thing the US could do to help you here is to use force against your government to remove its self defeating policies, and I don't think you would actually like that very much. Actions have consequences. Every choice is a tradeoff. You will never get anywhere with that blame other people for your problems attitude.
Nope. Its much easier to carry over bloated wealth/income from a higher CoL country to a lower CoL country to live like kings by gentrifying the locals and creating the same kind of problem that caused him to escape from his country.
That is how the US was screwed up in the first place - the internal inequality and gentrification created all the problems the US is in today, including the social conflicts. People like him are literally helping to export those problems by exporting the misery to other countries.
LOL my family immigrated to this country from a "shithole" when i was a kid and i've managed to claw my way out of immigrant poverty. i have exactly zero "generational responsibility".
You're getting very emotional about this. Are you a US citizen or not?
Because IIRC in one comment you complained about double taxation for US citizens when living abroad and here you suddenly play the immigrant family card.
It's hard to accept your victim role when you've been personally profiting off a FAANG company.
Bro you people must be mind-readers (or just poor readers) - the guy said I should stay and "fight" because I have "generational responsibility". I said no thanks I have no generations in the US (I am first gen). I am also a naturalized citizen which means the US will tax me bigly when I move abroad no matter who I work for and even renouncing the citizenship will cost me money. I said all this not because I'm a victim but to explain why I'm only willing to take at most a 50% pay cut. Are we clear now?
You don't have any generational responsibility, but not because you are an immigrant. You don't have any because "generational responsibility" is not a thing that exists.
It was the USA that gave you those opportunities to succeed and build wealth, raising you out of poverty. Without you would not in the position you are today, that itself deserves at least some responsibility to defend the nation against those who would tear down and destroy the democratic values, traditions, and institutions that enabled you and people like yourself to live freely and succeed.
Truthfully, as a European, I don't want people immigrating here who feel no responsibility to defend the democratic values, institutions, and nation that enabled them to live freely and succeed. Quite insane.
I don’t see what’s wrong with someone wanting to return to their home country instead of staying and risking a middle of the night policy change resulting in their residency status being cancelled and ICE dragging them and their children out of bed at night.
If one must point fingers, a better target is those actually in power.
you're never gonna be able to convince me that i owe some debt to a country/nation that barely ever tolerated me to begin with, you understand this right? also "i'm leaving" isn't "fuck you" in the least, it's just "i'm leaving".
Translation: "Die fighting in a civil war and maybe we'll grant you a visa".
This is, of course, stupid. You're arguing that if a tyrant king comes around, all of his neighbors should work tirelessly and for free to make sure the tyrant king's subjects remain under their control, so that the tyrant king still has materiel to invade you with. Most people are not in a position to individually resist or rebel against the system. Revolution is a collective concept, and the fish rots from the head. There's no causal link between denying someone a path to emigrate from their hellhole and them actually fixing their broke-ass society. They just wind up becoming a tool for that society to throw at you.
Think of every society like a building made of sentient bricks. If the bricks decide to leave, the building falls apart. But if the bricks are prohibited from leaving, then the building remains standing. Even if America doesn't actually restrict people from leaving (in fact, Trump kinda wants that), offering them no place to go is about the same thing as not letting them leave.
And, to be clear, the rot didn't start with Trump. It started with neoliberalism and the destruction of America's welfare system creating a permanent underclass of scammable peons. That same rot is present in much of the EU for the same reasons. America just succumbed to it first. You're watching a preview of what will happen in your country soon if you do not take immediate corrective action to fix the problem.
We've stopped hiring US citizens becuase they pose a national defense risk to the energy sector. I don't think anyone has any animosity toward US citizens here either though, but I do think you'd find some if you went to a local pub.
If you can self employ (and find housing, but if you have cash from a FAANG job you can probably pay cash), the Dutch American Friendship Treaty is a popular choice.
Sure. Money isn't everything. A broader concern is that many european countries have similar problems like housing costs and a rising far-right without any better solution. And besides, these sky-high wages won't last for long with a state intent on isolating itself and starving its consumer base of wages.
Personally, I'm looking at east asia and latin america.
I think you have the causation wrong. The far right is rising mostly due to social media which is full of fake news and propaganda. People working at US tech companies nurture this "engagement" in order to get rich while poisoning our societies.
Well, that may be true, although I didn't intend to imply any causal relationship at all. My point is I don't see the general situation in Europe (or the anglosphere) as much improved, just.... less advanced.
In Europe they have an issue with the economic refugees from Muslim countries. And in Denmark has the counter example of Sweden where they cause trouble. That's why the far right gets people's votes. Of course, all they do is point to the migrants. The far right won't be solving any issues, it will just create new ones.
Why you feel the need to discuss a "far right" in Europe while US tech leadership is performing roman salutes in front of live cameras?
Muslim refugees are not responsible for Epstein, Greenland, US import duties, US ignoring Minsk agreement or Facebook actively supporting fake news with engineering resources embedded into political campaigns. The vast majority of muslim refugees integrates extremely well and perform shitty jobs that help our society, all while being traumatized from wars they were born into.
The social media accounts of the "far right" sit in st. petersburg propaganda mills and their advertisement account managers sit in san francisco. Workers at US-tech companies are responsible for the unchecked bombardment of our citizens with propaganda and fake news.
> Workers at US-tech companies are responsible for the unchecked bombardment of our citizens with propaganda and fake news.
They're also responsible for the propaganda and fake news targeting the center and the left. It just works most effectively to drive people right because of.... widely-distributed personality quirks, shall we say. It's not clear this dynamic would disappear if social media disappeared, but I do think it would slow down.
I don’t think it will be a struggle for long. When you have a face to face meeting with your most powerful enemy and they tell you that they WILL conquer you (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/14/greenland-and-denma...), how can you stay coupled? This is going to accelerate the experiments started in Germany to move to open source software, etc. And I think Europe will pursue a heavy pivot to both grow local startups and couple to other powers like India or China.
At least for the next 50 years or so, the memory of this Trump administration will undermine any coupling to America. In the interim, I am not sure why these countries are even wasting time talking to American companies or representatives - they are absolutely not going to be a trustworthy long term partner:
> Rønde described the “Kafkaesque” experience of negotiating with local representatives who appear to have no actual authority.
I suspect there is going to be a flood of money in the EU for the creation of replacements for any US-based technology any of the EU countries are dependent upon (e.g., https://www.joindns4.eu). The real questions are whether there will be regulatory reform in the EU to facilitate this and will the money NOT flow to the usual dinosaurs. My impression is that Trump has sufficient pissed off EU governments such that there is some (small) hope for both. EC bureaucrats and MEPs might do well to read https://berthub.eu.
US tech workers believe their own lies and think they have some sort of magic sauce. For decades they've enjoyed government welfare and US-friendly regulation in many countries, which kept non-US competition small. An influx of non-US talent to US tech companies helped them stay innovative.
It is a courtesy that citizens from free countries pay US tech companies a middleman fee over various ways. What US tech workers fail to realize is that
- nobody needs Facebook to chat with their family
- nobody needs Visa, Paypal or Mastercard to pay in a local shop
- nobody needs Netflix subscription to watch a movie created by a non-US entity
- nobody needs to pay 50€ per month for privilege of Microsoft spying on your PC
- nobody needs their emails/pictures held hostage by Apple or Google
- nobody needs Uber in order to order a Taxi
So many of these things were done due to convenience and convention, making US tech workers richer and richer. I feel people are realizing what kind of pricks not only the management of US tech companies but also the US tech workers themselves are. Especially on HN these affluent workers from US tech companies run around and parrot the most stupid talking points while thinking their wealth comes from some sort of special skill.
We made them rich. They looted our data and poisoned our societies with fake news. They show no respect towards our systems or culture.
What also has been true the whole time is that nobody has been stopping companies in other countries from creating social media sites, electronic wallets, movie streaming, operating systems, image hosting, or food delivery services. You are right, creating these companies does not come from some special skills only found in the US. Not sure why you are mad at US for creating these services, especially because, like you said, nobody is forcing you to use them. And nobody in the US is going to be upset if an EU company creates a new fun or convenient web service.
If you think we are pissed about someone making a fun short video scrolling app then why have so many Americans downloaded it?
What our government is concerned about is that China does not allow big social media tech companies access to their markets, so allowing Chinese social media companies access to US markets is unfair, and a legitimate social influence concern. Of course you already know this if you are from Europe, given the myriad of restriction you guys have on tiktok.
But you are right, we do walk around wringing our fists that Spotify is dominating music streaming, going goddamnit we don't even like music but something should be done.
I recommend you read "careless people", the book about Facebook, where it is documented that Facebook illegally installed spyware alongside the Facebook app on the smartphones of their users. They monitored the apps their users where running alongside Facebook, which allowed Facebook to not only monitor all competitors but also see the rise of WhatsApp, which ultimately led to the "surprise" acquisition of WhatsApp.
Not to mention that Facebook and Google unknowingly ingested phone contact lists from smartphones of their users on a massive scale. So their "advantage" was extremely unethical behavior, which today would be considered an illegal crime.
So yes, it is literally Apple and Google stopping my European company to do the same, because they make it really hard to leech user data from their platforms.
> nobody is forcing you to use them
Do you remember internet.org? There's an interesting section in "careless people" about how Zuckerberg was working on bundling Facebook with smartphone contracts so people can use it for free. One country rolled out Facebook for free and it resulted in the Rohingyan Genocidg because Facebook enabled unchecked fake news along religious divides, while over years ignoring all warnings about the problem.
Facebook caused genocide... Ok man. And BMW, Mercedes, Bosch, Siemens, VW, Zeiss, Fiat, etc. were responsible for genocide during WW2. But this is all completely off topic.
> Apple and Google stopping my European company to do the same, because they make it really hard to leech user data from their platforms.
I cant tell if you are for or against collecting user data.
If it's any consolation US startups have to compete with existing US companies too. Also it doesn't hurt to work with them instead of against them. Some European companies are getting quite rich from such relationships. Arm is making a killing off Apple. Ayden gets paid every time you order an Uber. Google licenses Nokia and Ericsson technologies. I'm sure there are many other examples.
The problem is that convenience trumps everything.
- It is convenient to use Facebook to chat with family
- It is convenient to use credit cards to pay the local shop
- It is convenient to use Netflix to watch movies
- It is convenient to pay a (lower) monthly fee than a (higher) purchase price for MS products
- It is convenient to have Apple / Google take care of email
- It is convenient to use Uber instead of a taxi
The golden cage of convenience is why nothing will change in the US -- we prize convenience above all else.
Sorry to be blunt, but it is extremely inconvenient to be force-exposed to internal politics of some religious shithole country which twice votes against their own interests. Where people don't believe in healthcare but accept school shootings. Where society cares about body positivity until Ozempic arrives. A country which talks bigly about geopolitics and ignores agreements they have signed.
It is inconvenient to buy a Tesla to help save the planet and then see emerald nepo baby Elon Musk doing hitler salutes, and US citizens downplaying it due to their special understanding of freedom of speech.
Or a sweaty Peter Thiel morphing from startup evangelist to religious nut babbling about the antichrist.
Or a Jeff Bezos who ships stuff from china to europe being so unhappy with his life that he needs to marry the wife of his neighbor.
On top of this there's this still unresolved child sexual abuse scandal that basically implicates all of US upper class including senior leadership of US tech companies, who suddenly come out of retirement like Sergey Brin because they keep being mentioned in the Epstein files.
For more and more non-US people the inconvenience of seeing all this outweighs the benefit of being able to use some sort of web application. We have survived before on Nokia phones and TomTom navigation systems, and we'll be able to do so again.
US tech companies had US government support and helpful non-US regulatory environment to capture value from our countries. In their core, they are rent-seeking middlemen, parasitic to our economies.
The parasite needs a host, but the host can always find a new parasite.
You don't need it, but you want it, which is why you buy it. The vast majority of the economies of all post-industrial nations are dedicated not to needs, but wants. And convenience is one of the biggest ones. Go ahead, call me a prick, but you're a good customer, and I know you'll keep buying. We didn't loot your data. You gave it freely in exchange for the extremely convenient services that are built on it. You can go ahead and not use Google Maps next time you need to get somewhere you don't know the route. You can buy a map book and put it in your car and navigate the old way. But we both know you won't.
It is also a courtesy that free countries respect US copyright. I wouldn't be surprised if EU countries have already started ramping up corporate espionage and are making contingency plans to seize all data and assets on their territory. If they manage to get ahold of source code and data, they may be able to keep some services running without US involvement.
Netflix is a good example: the functionality isn't difficult to reproduce, and the only thing that restricts its library is copyright, which the EU could just stop enforcing for American companies.
> It is also a courtesy that free countries respect US copyright
Which, itself, is downstream of the US signing onto the Berne convention. American copyright actually used to be reasonable and (western) Europe was the insane one with life terms. All that is ugly about the US was buried so deeply in Europe that it is outside, here, with us.
Then America had the extremely short-sighted idea to assign copyright to software, and then use software to enforce copyright, and then make it independently illegal to tell anyone how to bypass that enforcement software. This was all then foisted back onto Europe, whose creative industries begged them for it, not knowing that it basically meant surrendering to the US before the war had even started.
Seizing American copyright would be a good start, but what you really want is to drop anti-circumvention law. Because that's the first domino[0] in the chain. Europe is chock full of businesses that would absolutely fall in line around a tyrant king just like American businesses have, and laws like that enable such businesses to exist.
I just can't see it happening. The United States benefits from decades of compounding advantages compared to the EU: elite research universities, talent pipelines, mature capital markets, and tons of integrated industries (fintech).
This is obvious in the recent AI race. EU-headquartered companies remain rare compared to their US/Chinese counterparts.
AI race is a very good example, because Microsoft customers in the EU pay significantly increased Microsoft license fees so that Microsoft can give that money to OpenAI. Without Microsoft having non-US customers as a cash cow the AI valuations would not be anywhere where they are today. In return non-US Microsoft customers get a useless copilot slapped into all UIs and have to throw away all their computers and buy new ones just because of Windows 11 software update.
The other things you list are weak arguments:
- With mature capital markets you mean they plan to dismantle the Fed autonomy? Did you see the powell video?
- Concerning "elite research universities": are you aware that they significantly cut research funding for US universities, prompting many researchers to move outside the country?
- With talent pipeline do you mean top graduates from EU and other non-US regions who bring innovation to US tech companies?
I think the delusion among US tech workers is immense. The moat is not that big.
If other countries stop sharing your idea of copyright and software patents there is not much you can do.
NATO allies like Germany are sending troops to protect their ally nation along with Denmark. This isn’t a fight Trump is prepared for. If he somehow decides to move forward - we are all going to have to face a hard choice.
As much as I think US annexation of Greenland would be the single worst foreign policy move of my lifetime, and maybe in US history, the US military is not the one who isn't prepared for that fight.
It's not that hard to create your own search engine, office suite, and school ecosystem. I mean, no single one of google's services isn't replaceable, especially if a country sets its mind to it. Just do that if you're worried about it.
> In 2024, Google ran a set of tests of user interest in news content in Denmark and several other countries, concluding that removing such content had “no measurable impact” on search ad revenue. Those findings — along with the testing itself — have come under harsh criticism from Danish lawmakers.
I'm not really sure what Denmark is complaining about? It sounds like Google decided that removing Danish media and news from their services would have no impact on their finances whatsoever, therefore they are firm on their negotiating position since it's basically "take it or leave it".
And Denmark is also somehow trying to force Google to list and index their media, and at their price.
Because "business" isn't just "business" in Denmark and many other countries. Journalism for example, isn't just about the financial bottom-line, journalism has a societal role, and also the move could be seen as trying to avoid paying publishers under EU rules designed to support a free press.
I think a lot of friction between businesses and countries in Europe can be better understood if we better understood the difference in how countries treat things like "business" and other stuff. I understand in the US it's different, money basically rules, you can fire people whenever you want and so on, but in many places in the world, people have a different relationship to businesses, it's not just about money there.
Particularly when it comes to journalism. From reading news from Denmark about it, politicians been repeatedly argued that Google's framing reduces journalism to a revenue input, ignoring its democratic function.
If journalism really weren't just about the financial bottom line in Denmark, then why are they quibbling over what Google will pay them at all? It sounds like they'll be happy with just Google listing and driving traffic to their content for free.
You're missing the point. I speak American so I can translate. He's basically saying journalism is a matter of National Security. It needs to be done correctly to a high level at all costs, much like education. Google (Silicon Valley) is messing with it.
National security could be a valid concern. But Danish media leveraging DK gov't to rollback the reality could never be a success story. Those media are failing not because they are not in the US. Established American media have the same troubles and complains.
I'm ok with it. I think this situation is caused by the Baumol effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect
I think it's ok if the highly productive parts of society subsidize the crucial-but-low-productivity areas (healthcare, education, etc).
Otherwise this happens https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/te... See all the important careers on the bottom right of the first graph. Then your people elect fascists because the media and education systems suck and they don't know any better.
Why is it the responsibility of American tech companies to subsidize Danish news and media industries? If it's really that important for national security, shouldn't the Danish government be setting up some kind of a state journalism fund to subsidize it themselves?
This is just a shakedown of American companies.
Denmark has one of the most comprehensive media subsidy systems in the world.
Google makes a lot of money off monopolizing advertising in Denmark. They are just playing hardball, they don’t think they can be replaced.
> The publishers say that their industry is bleeding out while they wait for a deal that may never come.
It sounds like their government needs to do even more subsidizing if they're really that reliant on US companies to pay their bills.
Yep, see the article
> Denmark isn’t just resisting U.S. tech; it is one of the few nations actively building its own sovereign alternatives for critical infrastructure.
> In Rogaczewski’s view, sovereign digitization is not just a defensive measure against Silicon Valley; it is the only way to maintain the welfare state in the 21st century.
It'll just take a while cause Google is so big.
If it's a matter of national security and compromise isn't possible, I'd encourage Denmark to seek or create alternatives; it's the best they can hope for. Denmark has no obligation to deal with Google and Google has no obligation to deal with Denmark, regardless of the impact those choices have on the other party.
Yeah, and that's what China did to Google in 2010. Widely panned at the time, but perhaps prescient.
"We need journalism to be done 'correctly' as a matter of national security" sounds like something that the CCP would say.
The facts are clear: Regulate the companies or lose your democracy. FB's impact on democracy has been clear for a long time. This is just the latest - https://www.brusselstimes.com/1916422/us-tech-giants-allying...
If regulations can legitimately be advocated for, they can be advocated against as well.
Facebook wouldn’t have any vested interest in the far left, the far right, the far up or the far down in the EU if the EU wasn’t giving them reasons to take an interest. If the parties in power were really worried that Facebook was going to be the difference-maker, they could undercut the opposition and remove the issue entirely by rolling back their needless regulations and keeping their own desire to overstep their authority and dictate terms to foreign enterprises in check.
> If regulations can legitimately be advocated for, they can be advocated against as well.
That's not logically necessary.
Wait, so supporting opposition parties is somehow losing democracy? And you want the government to prevent them from doing that?
So you say we must choose between losing freedom of the press and losing democracy? I say you lose democracy if you lose freedom of the press.
There's already boundaries on what the press can and cannot print (libel, etc). Gotta get out of Constitutional Law 101
Right. You must be referring to the libel laws that have specific exemptions for politically powerful or otherwise publicly prominent individuals specifically to avoid intrusion into freedom of the press. And you think that helps your point?
Hmm, they're not 'messing with' journalism or national security. They just don't care enough to index denmark journalism. I'm also not sure how denmark can strongarm google et. al. into doing anything at all. Is this incorrect, is there some sort of path forward here for denmark to get what they want?
In practice, that's a form of censorship since it inhibits the ability of people in Denmark to discover domestic news articles through search.
But Google is willing to host their content in search, right?
They're just not willing to pay since there's no revenue benefit to search hosting it. It seems like Danish media doesn't like this and has chosen to withhold their content, which is their right of course, but it seems strange to contort that into a claim that Google is doing censorship.
> In practice, that's a form of censorship since it inhibits the ability of people in Denmark to discover domestic news articles through search.
No it doesn't. It it inhibits the ability of people in Denmark to discover domestic news articles through GOOGLE search. A subtle but hugely distinct difference, making your point quite moot.
In this context "journalism" usually refers not to a crowd of Mothers Teresas seeking to improve society in voluntary contradiction to their own market (or guild/class/whatever) interests, but a bunch of business entities which were born out of printed newspapers, feeling uncertain about their revenues after changes in technology of information delivery ruined their niche. And trying to leverage their established relations with politicians to extract more profit. It's not like Google is offending little pixies here. After all, there are youtube channels which have a societal role too, and search engines too I guess can make a similar claim.
Other commenter's note about national security issue is more on point but then I doubt that bailing out failing news platforms would make them as influential as they used to be in the bygone era.
This does not support freedom of the press. This policy is essentially a tax on web indexers (in practice, Google) that is paid directly to the news companies. This means that they are entirely dependent on government authority for their revenue, which is the opposite of freedom of the press. On top of that, only companies that are defined as "news outlets" by the government are eligible for forced indexing and payment. So not only is the government setting itself up as the revenue source, but it gets to choose who gets the money.
lol only on this forum can you construe the government regulating big tech as an anti freedom stance.
Google, Meta, Apple, and Amazon are society destroying companies. They are Walmart times a trillion. Any country that is not directly taxing these wildly profitable companies are leaving free money on the table.
You are hiding behind the word "regulating" which is meaningless by itself instead of talking about the particular regulation in question. This is a regulation that the tech companies pay money directly to a list of media companies picked by the government. It is absolutely an anti freedom stance.
No, you're just decrying any government intervention as bad which is moronic. The only solace I can take is that a large majority of US voters despise big tech and tech workers. Go out and do some canvassing, I have across the country and the sentiment is quite clear.
Whoever is the first President to decapitate a tech company will likely be put on Mount Rushmore as a hero of the people.
Get out of your bubble because the upcoming change is going to give you whiplash.
Just like they hate oil companies. But that doesn't stop them from pulling up to the gas station, or enjoying any of the other thousands of goods and services dependent on oil. They even go out an buy massive inefficient cars and spend multiples of what they need to. And despite all the supposed hatred, no politician dares to mess with the oil industry because at the end of the day they know nothing will get the voters out for blood against them quite like rising gas prices.
They hate the tech industry you say? They want you to "decapitate" a tech company you say? Americans love two things above all else, convenience and complaining. Go ahead, take away their overnight Amazon deliveries, Google searches, smartphones, Instagram, and Tiktok, and see where that gets you.
The criticism was that Google have a dominant position on search market, Google selected 1% of their users to run the experiment on, but without informing them. That is users didn’t know that their search results were manipulated and articles they would otherwise have found didn’t show up.
So the argument presented by Danish authorities and media companies were that information should flow freely in a democracy and by doing a huge experiment like this without informing users is against the rights of Danish citizens.
"Manipulated" is a loaded and meaningless term here. All results are generated by algorithm, so that means 99% see the output of algorithm A and 1% see the output of algorithm B. Neither is more "manipulated" than the other.
It is possible that neither are more manipuled tough it's impossible to tell. What seems clear from your example above is that both are manipulated, just in different ways and with google's incentive. It is understandable that countries came to the conclusion that this is posing a threat to their national security.
"Manipulated" has strong negative connotations, but it could just mean that the results are chosen and controlled by the search engine. In which case, it's a meaningless statement. The entire purpose of any search engine is to choose results for queries.
Or it can mean the results were altered from some ideal baseline algorithm that we consider unmanipulated. The only obvious candidate for this baseline would be the search engine's regular algorithm. But if you're saying that's not the baseline, then it's unclear what you consider to be the true baseline and therefore unclear what "manipulated" means.
I agree that countries may consider search engines, social media, or anything else that can affect flow of information to be a national security threat.
And what, exactly, is the national security threat here? If Google is manipulating results to favor its advertisers or the political positions of its owners, that's what all publishers do, and have always done and nobody ever called it a national security threat. The "national security threat" here seems to be that they are showing people content that the government doesn't want them to see.
Of course they wouldn't tell users if they're in the control group or experimental group. It would destroy the validity of the experiment.
You still should have to consent to be studied.
I’ve been part of multiple clinical trials and consent was always there. The control group exists. They know they’re in the study but they may not know they’re the control group.
I'm not commenting on the ethics of A/B testing without informing the customer.
Maybe I misunderstood the comment I was replying to. If they meant that the experiment's results were probably valid but conducting the experiment was unethical, then my response was unnecessary.
First it is not manipulation please read the terms of service and user consent on this issue. Second this is standard practice A/B testing is universal and companies do a holdout experiment all the time it is also called Withholding test.
It sounds to me like Denmark's media and news isn't very valuable from an ad sales perspective. So Google has set their price reflecting what they think that value is: not much. And Denmark is now getting their lawmakers involved because they think it's worth a lot more and they want to force Google to buy it for a lot more.
Honestly, it doesn't sound like a lot of these EU countries are interested in digital sovereignty or developing their own services. They just want to force the American companies to sell their services at rates favorable to them by getting their regulators involved.
Yeah it seems like if they were really struggling to break up then they wouldn't be trying to force Google or Meta to the negotiating table. They would be simply kicking them out and not utilizing their services at all.
But it's actually the opposite. They are trying to get their lawmakers to force Google and Meta to provide them their services at below market value!
It seems like Google and Meta are using their dominant position to take as big a part of ad revenue as they possibly can, and if that means independent news companies where actual journalism is conducted can’t survive, then they don’t really care.
Danish media are trying to survive, as high quality journalism is necessary for democracy to function. They can’t avoid being on the big platforms, as Google and Meta have this dominant gatekeeper position in the market - this is where the media pull new users into their sites.
People who are capable of building things don't go into government. "Bureaucracy" has a connotation of where creativity and innovation goes to die for a reason. The personality type that goes into bureaucracy thinks about this like "why would I put in the effort to build something when I could just use the state monopoly on violence to shake down the suckers who already did all that hard work for me?" Of course they lie to the public, and most importantly to themselves, that they have higher motives, but that is the underlying logic.
> People who are capable of building things don't go into government.
Spoken like an American who doesn't know what government actually does.
Well in our case what it does is mostly get in the way of building things
Meanwhile, the Netherlands seems intent to sell its national login service to an American company.
https://nltimes.nl/2026/01/15/dutch-experts-warn-us-takeover...
There is much more nuance to it: https://ibestuur.nl/markt-en-overheid/digitale-infrastructuu...
“The Netherlands” isn’t selling anything.
The Dutch national government mandated login system relies on technologies and hosting of a private company that was in conversation with an American counterpart about a possible acquisition.
Bad? Yes
The Netherlands selling their login service? No
The local campaign related to this is Danmark Skifter (Denmark Changes): https://danmarkskifter.dk/en/
> The publishers say that their industry is bleeding out while they wait for a deal that may never come.
If your industry cannot sustain itself without checks from tech companies for using content as LLM training data that is quite a precarious situation. What was the economic situation for the news industry in Denmark prior to 2021?
This reads like they are trying to force American tech companies to subsidize their local news and journalism industries.
The question is, if they want it so bad, why don't they just establish a state fund for news and journalism so they can subsidize it themselves?
It honestly just feels like a shakedown.
And they created a powerful cartel which can pressure politicians to benefit the cartel:
I've said it before - about MS. But if you move enough Danes off American IT the rest will follow, I think once you have a 30-40 percent move then within less than a year a landslide, maybe quicker as it is now tied up with patriotism.
Doesn't really doesn't matter what it cost to do. You should still do it. Of course, within reason, there may be some software that it's just intractable to reproduce.
US tech companies are taking up middlemen roles to extract wealth from developed nations, while not adding a lot of value on their own. Their moat is not that big, and there are mature viable alternatives.
One does not need google in their lives to be exposed to advertisements to a local brand. Or pay a percentage fee to paypal or visa if you buy a local product.
US tech companies lose much more from a decoupling than Europe does.
If they are not adding any value, then the content companies can decline to be indexed. They have always had that right, but they do not exercise it which is a clear signal that indexing adds value. So they are getting a service that adds value for free, and not only are they not grateful for that, they are actually so greedy that they want Google to pay them.
It depends on more than just that. Mindshare, network effects, and the state of a technological art all matter.
The moat crossing isn't in competing with the likes of Google or Paypal directly. The moat crossing is in accumulating enough capital to build the thing that leapfrogs them. Being a middleman allows you to accumulate a lot of money while expending fairly little of it. Then, you focus on the next thing, be it AI or whatever, while collecting middleman fees.
This has a collective effect on a nation's economy. You could tell the American companies to go kick rocks and develop your own local alternatives, but then you're expending your capital on developing a local alternative, not developing the Next Big Thing (TM), and the Americans are. The risk is that your economy becomes less competitive overall while becoming more competitive with one segment of the American economy.
On the other hand, you can’t develop a technology if you have no knowledge of its inner workings.
This is an issue the US finds itself in now as it tries to onshore manufacturing again after allowing someone else to play middle man for decades.
Yes, the US has plenty of capital resources but that doesn’t directly translate into production when you have to setup not just a single factory but an entire supply chain.
Arguments in favor of US politics which are based on "mature markets" and "capital" have become extremely weak since they started dismantling Fed autonomy and used ChatGPT to roll the dice on random tariffs.
It doesn't help that the clever talking heads behind US "capital" such as Peter Thiel, Elon Musk and David Sacks have outed themselves as complete and utter morons.
Denmark is not alone here and it is also not just due to Trump threatening to enslave all Greenlanders by military junta force either. That is just part of the military complex being tied to "business" - and happened in the past too, by the way. Trump just makes it "more official".
The whole TechBro mafia structure behind Trump has again and again threatened damage against Europeans. A good example was Vance trolling on the security conference in Munich, where he complained how the ultra right are silenced in Europe. This showed that the new agenda that the TechBros in the USA do, is actively hostile - this in addition to Trump acting as agent Krasnov buddy for Putin. So, any more money that goes into the USA, is ultimately money that goes against Europe. In many ways Canadians understand this problem MUCH better than many governments in Europe - just look at the german government. They are absolutely unwilling to stop being so obedient to the USA. Denmark at the least understands the problem - why is Germany so strange?
idk, If I was in control of a country in the EU I would realize, unfortunately for pretty much everyone on the planet, that we have made a drastic miscalculation by relying on the US so heavily for defense.
However, that is not something that can be reversed meaningfully in less than a decade. So for now, I would play the long game like Germany while working to get the EU to build up a military force large enough to significantly reduce our dependence on the US.
It's not as if the US hasn't repeatedly requested that European nations invest in their defense for the past few decades.
Looking at it dispassionately as a European living in the US, if you wanted to foment the sort of mistrust many Americans have of Europe, I don't think you could have created a more invidious policy.
It can be reversed in a year. In 1941 the US increased its production of tanks by 7x. In 1942 it increased production again by 4x. This idea that building industry takes decades needs to die a painful death.
The US is a large country with plenty of resources.
There's a certain large European country with plenty of resources that is pretty famous for scaling its tank production just a couple years before the US did.
> for Putin
Its because you people still keep blaming 'external factors' for homegrown problems that you have those problems. Both Trump and the forces behind Trump have been there long before any current head of state around the world entered politics for the first time.
> just look at the german government. They are absolutely unwilling to stop being so obedient to the USA. Denmark at the least understands the problem - why is Germany so strange?
Denmark doesnt 'understand' anything either - it agreed to set up a 'working group' for Greenland, which basically means they agreed to give Trump what he wants. The island may nominally remain in Danish ownership, but it will likely be effectively controlled by the US.
[dead]
So, once again, Stallman is proved right?
i would take a 50% pay cut (FAANG) to move to denmark (with an accelerated path to perm residency) to work on whatever thing they want. any takers? actually any EU nation...
Edit: with all of the negativity under this comment I'm reminded of a hilarious experience I had when I first interned at FB during grad school: I was on some online game with a friend of mine and his friend (whom I'd never met) and we were on voice chat. My buddy asks me how the internship is going and I gave the standard "it's hard but I'm learning a lot" response. Afterwards the third guy chimes in and asks if me I don't feel ashamed (or whatever) about working for FB. It was literally my first tech internship so I said something equivocal. Then I asked the guy what he did/where he worked. I shit you not the guy was literally a radar engineer for the US army. The irony was clearly lost on him and he even went as far as insisting he (as opposed to me) was doing very good/valuable work.
How about instead of taking the easy way out and preserving your wealth you stay in the US and take up your generational responsibility and figure out how to fix the situation that you and your fellow citizens have created?
Same feeling from me. I also disliked his framing of moving his FAANG wealth to outcompete EU workers on jobs and housing, then making it sound like he's doing Europeans a favor with this.
"Yeah guys, I got enough blood money now from ad targeting people in the US, so to clear my conscience I can come give you guys a hand to fight the evil guys I had no issue with when they were paying me big money, but only IF you pay me 50% of what they pay me."
How about thanks but no thanks. We don't need this kind of fake virtue signaling "help". Enjoy your money somewhere else.
Edit: sorry I sound so mean, but it's how I feel.
The fact that the US didn't take your attitude and allowed workers from all over the world to come to Silicon Valley and compete with Americans for jobs and housing ("compete for housing" being the most ridiculous concept I have ever heard of) is one of the many reasons why SV is in the US and not in Europe.
>"compete for housing" being the most ridiculous concept I have ever heard of
How can I have a productive discussion with someone who doesn't know or refuses to acknowledge the reality of housing supply/demand and resulting gentrification?
Gee, if only there was a city in the world that's a big tech hub and we could study the effects on its housing market and citizen who don't work in tech and how they're impacted.
>is one of t many reasons why SV is in the US and not in Europe
I've been to SF and I'm not sure I want the issues I saw there over here.
And to correct you, SV is what it is due to the WW2 and cold war military electronics industry rooted in government spending brewing there instead of being bombed to the ground like Europe, plus the financial engineering leavers of the US FED being able to print virtually gold and use that virtual gold to buy everything they ever need to win including foreign competitors and suppliers while offloading the resulting inflation burden onto the rest of the world, or use trade restrictions and military force as the second option to block any potential rising competitors that threaten the existing hegemony.
SV is in the US because of heavy government spending to further national interests. And US intelligence community was one of the first to realize that total domination of home computers / smartphones / social media allows them to exert a lot of power.
SV took workers from all over the world because these workers were extremely skilled and cheap. They didn't compete with Americans for jobs because there were simply not enough Americans with the needed skills.
Foreign tech workers need housing but they don't own land and can't vote in your elections, so the fact housing is bad is 100% on US citizens.
1. SV workers are anything but cheap
2. There are plenty of Americans with the skills. I know because I went from never having written any code or having any technical education to full time employment in SV in under a year.
3. Housing issues are 100% the fault of the local US citizens and their idiotic policies, but immigrant tech workers absolutely do own land and I know several who do. Plenty of them vote because they are now citizens.
>Housing issues are 100% the fault of the local US citizens
>immigrant tech workers absolutely do own land [...] they are now citizens.
>Housing issues are 100% the fault of the local US citizens
Man, I wonder when the realization will kick in.
The realization that a large majority of the electorate is native born and the rules that prevent development existed before the immigrants got here?
Let me spell it out for you. This is 100% a stupid regulation issue and has fuck all to do with immigration. If the US had a more restrictive immigration policy the same thing would have happened because so many native born Americans (including myself) moved to SV for high paying jobs. Supply and demand is what it is whether that demand comes from a US citizen or an immigrant.
lol where are you getting all this from? first of all there are 3 letters in FAANG which don't do ads, second of all i didn't express anywhere that i felt i was doing anyone any favors, third of all are you aware that US citizens are double taxed no matter where they live, where they earn their money, fourth of all are you aware there's an exit tax on your total net worth if you renounce citizenship?
y'all are extra spicy on this topic seemingly.
EDIT:
> We don't need this kind of fake virtue signaling "help"
i wasn't virtue signalling anything - that's why i said money is still an important part of the calculus. i was literally just curious if there were such accelerated pathways for SWEs...
> there are 3 letters in FAANG which don't do ads,
FAANG is Facebook(Meta), Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google(Alphabet) right?
Facebook and Google are heavy on ads, Amazon has ads all over their shopping experience and in their video product; AWS isn't connected with ads though, Netflix has an ads tier in their video product too, I opted out of Apple so I don't know what ads look like on their products but I think they have a small ads product?
I'm not quite sure why the negative responses to your offer though. Sure, it's a bit mercenary, but it's an offer. Personally, I don't think it's really about personnel though, recruiting FAANG employees to Europe wouldn't generate European FAANGs; Europe needs to look at the business conditions that spawn these kinds of companies and see what they can change to encourage the kinds of companies they want. Why did Apple survive while early computer companies from Europe all folded and also where have all the European handset makers gone; where are the online megaretailers for Europe and why didn't they consider selling their surplus computing resources; why haven't Euro television companies developed a cross border streaming service; maybe something about search engines, maybe what stopped Europe from playing in the search engine wars before Google became dominant; bonus non faang question, why did Europay merge with Mastercard.
> recruiting FAANG employees to Europe wouldn't generate European FAANGs
Yep, this. We already have enough local FANG level talent, talent is not the problem in Europe.
What we don't have is:
Until you fix both these point, or at least point 2 and kick out the US military and companies from our continent, like China did, you can't have a domestic SV that challenges the one from the US no matter how much good talent you have.And we can't do that since we can't even kick Russia's ass right now after 4 years, let alone stand up to the US hegemony and enforce our will over them, so we'll continue to be dependent on them.
I don't agree with these bitter Europeans at all, but offering to take a 50% pay cut does come off very much like you are trying to do someone a favor.
Calling people "bitter" doesn't win an argument. I think US tech workers get quite emotional once they feel the slightest headwind that threatens to burst their bubble.
I call you bitter because bitterness is dripping from your comments:
> How about instead of taking the easy way out and preserving your wealth you stay in the US and take up your generational responsibility and figure out how to fix the situation that you and your fellow citizens have created?
This feels even more bitter than if you had written "I am bitter over the success of the US tech industry."
I think the point is more that 50% of senior FAANG total comp is still a lot more than you get at most European places.
100-120k net is considered quite a good salary and is unattainable even for most as a contracted employee. You do get benefits like healthcare and pensions which work differently. You can get higher rates if you are good at marketing, but then you need to insure your unemployment and pension yourself as well.
My latest info on Silicon Valley compensation (Google, Netflix, and Twitter) was that 400k/year gross before tax and RSU was typically achievable with even higher regular occurrences. 50% of that is still way over what you typically find here. (Switzerland excluded but all prices are inflated in Switzerland.)
In the US you have to privately pay for many things that you get for free in more developed nations.
For example safety is not guaranteed due to extreme homelessness and easy access to guns, so you have to pay more for gated communities and security/concierge. You need to privately pay for healthcare and also pay off debt from university tuition, both is much cheaper in EU. If you have kids, you have to pay for private schools.
Then all over the US the infrastructure is so extremely bad that you don't even have sidewalks and you need to take a car to get anywhere, with really bad public transport.
If you want to just emulate European lifestyle in the US you really need to spend a lot of money.
>If you want to just emulate European lifestyle in the US you really need to spend a lot of money.
Even a lot of Europeans today are not having the envied European lifestyle right now. Things are getting worse here too, so you also need to spend out of pocket and have a very good paying job, just to get the European lifestyle that was the norm 10+ years ago with an average job.
And it's only gonna get downhill from here with the increase in defense spending that's gotta come from somewhere, the stagnating economy and increasing CoL, the ballooning retirement and welfare timebomb, etc.
If you make 50% of US FANG wages, then you'll probably be fine, but most people don't.
And there's a lot of places in the US (excluding the major cities) that don't have those issues you mentioned and where you can live a pretty chill and safe lifestyle too if you're a skilled worker on a decent income, similar how there's cities in Europe that have a lot of poverty, crime and failing infrastructure as well where you need a good job and skills to get out. It's not as binary as you try to make it be.
> first of all there are 3 letters in FAANG which don't do ads
They all do ads. Apple is about to add them to their Maps.
https://advertising.amazon.com
https://ads.apple.com
https://advertising.netflix.com/en-us
https://business.google.com/us/google-ads/
https://business.meta.com
https://ads.microsoft.com
<rolls eyes> alright i'm totally responsible for the trumpocalypse because somewhere someone in my company is running some kind of ads service </rolls eyes>.
> then posturing like a anti-FANG freedom fighter for 50% cut, which might rub some people the wrong way as being a by hypocritica
The only place I was posturing was in your imagination. I guess you're salty about FAANG salaries in the US (and that's what has you tilted) but I was literally just asking about comparable salary and accelerated immigration pathways. The comment is very short - I don't know where you're getting all of this content from.
People don't like how you both virtue signal and show ignorance at the same time.
It's not about "someone in my company is running some kind of ads service" but that you and your colleagues collectively have had a net negative impact on free societies all over the world.
Nobody is jealous about FAANG salaries if you need to step over unconscious homeless people on your way to work, fear about healthcare, university tuition and that your kid might be shot at school.
Nobody said you're responsible for ads, but people have an issue with you accepting to take the big FANG money which you knew comes from ads and other nefarious monopolistic anti consumer things FANGs do, and then wanting to be a anti-FANG freedom fighter but only if you can maintain 50% of FANG money, which might rub some people the wrong way as being a by hypocritical.
My 2 cents.
Moving to another continent isn't a particularly easy way out. It's also more than 99% of people are prepared to do.
So you're trying to say that taking a flight is some sort sacrifice?
Most of the people I know have lived in at least one other country for several months, while most of US citizens not once in their life have left the USA and don't even own a passport.
Imagine people cross continents with just clothes and a backpack while avoiding law enforcement.
When you have a US passport, FAANG on your resume and 6-7 figure net worth, I wouldn't dare complain about difficulty in immigration.
> generational responsibility
It's not generational responsibility. Everyone has at least some responsibility to defend the democratic values, traditions, and nation that have enabled them to live freely and peacefully.
For someone who has greatly benefited from the opportunities the nation afforded them, it's insulting for such a person to behave as if they possess no responsibility to defend the values, tradition, and nation that enabled them to succeed.
It's hard for me to escape how strongly I feel about this. As a European, I don't wish for such sorts of people to immigrate here. They can go back.
The average person has almost no way of making any serious impact on society, especially in this time period. Besides that, the US was founded by people taking "the easy way out" and leaving another country, so it's only fitting.
Though the commenter mentioned working at a FAANG, so maybe they're far more culpable in this situation than the average person. If that's the case, I'd have to agree with you.
We are responsible for your nation's failure to be competitive in this industry? There are many European companies that operate freely in the US, so it is not our laws that are getting in your way. The only thing the US could do to help you here is to use force against your government to remove its self defeating policies, and I don't think you would actually like that very much. Actions have consequences. Every choice is a tradeoff. You will never get anywhere with that blame other people for your problems attitude.
Nope. Its much easier to carry over bloated wealth/income from a higher CoL country to a lower CoL country to live like kings by gentrifying the locals and creating the same kind of problem that caused him to escape from his country.
That is how the US was screwed up in the first place - the internal inequality and gentrification created all the problems the US is in today, including the social conflicts. People like him are literally helping to export those problems by exporting the misery to other countries.
LOL my family immigrated to this country from a "shithole" when i was a kid and i've managed to claw my way out of immigrant poverty. i have exactly zero "generational responsibility".
You're getting very emotional about this. Are you a US citizen or not?
Because IIRC in one comment you complained about double taxation for US citizens when living abroad and here you suddenly play the immigrant family card.
It's hard to accept your victim role when you've been personally profiting off a FAANG company.
Bro you people must be mind-readers (or just poor readers) - the guy said I should stay and "fight" because I have "generational responsibility". I said no thanks I have no generations in the US (I am first gen). I am also a naturalized citizen which means the US will tax me bigly when I move abroad no matter who I work for and even renouncing the citizenship will cost me money. I said all this not because I'm a victim but to explain why I'm only willing to take at most a 50% pay cut. Are we clear now?
You don't have any generational responsibility, but not because you are an immigrant. You don't have any because "generational responsibility" is not a thing that exists.
It was the USA that gave you those opportunities to succeed and build wealth, raising you out of poverty. Without you would not in the position you are today, that itself deserves at least some responsibility to defend the nation against those who would tear down and destroy the democratic values, traditions, and institutions that enabled you and people like yourself to live freely and succeed.
Truthfully, as a European, I don't want people immigrating here who feel no responsibility to defend the democratic values, institutions, and nation that enabled them to live freely and succeed. Quite insane.
"fuck you i got mine" a true american indeed
I don’t see what’s wrong with someone wanting to return to their home country instead of staying and risking a middle of the night policy change resulting in their residency status being cancelled and ICE dragging them and their children out of bed at night.
If one must point fingers, a better target is those actually in power.
you're never gonna be able to convince me that i owe some debt to a country/nation that barely ever tolerated me to begin with, you understand this right? also "i'm leaving" isn't "fuck you" in the least, it's just "i'm leaving".
Translation: "Die fighting in a civil war and maybe we'll grant you a visa".
This is, of course, stupid. You're arguing that if a tyrant king comes around, all of his neighbors should work tirelessly and for free to make sure the tyrant king's subjects remain under their control, so that the tyrant king still has materiel to invade you with. Most people are not in a position to individually resist or rebel against the system. Revolution is a collective concept, and the fish rots from the head. There's no causal link between denying someone a path to emigrate from their hellhole and them actually fixing their broke-ass society. They just wind up becoming a tool for that society to throw at you.
Think of every society like a building made of sentient bricks. If the bricks decide to leave, the building falls apart. But if the bricks are prohibited from leaving, then the building remains standing. Even if America doesn't actually restrict people from leaving (in fact, Trump kinda wants that), offering them no place to go is about the same thing as not letting them leave.
And, to be clear, the rot didn't start with Trump. It started with neoliberalism and the destruction of America's welfare system creating a permanent underclass of scammable peons. That same rot is present in much of the EU for the same reasons. America just succumbed to it first. You're watching a preview of what will happen in your country soon if you do not take immediate corrective action to fix the problem.
If you're a US citizen you should probably pick a different European country. USA is not very popular here in Denmark. Likely wont be for a while.
Here in Denmark I hold no animosity toward Americans and none of my circle do. The current US administration on the other hand…
We've stopped hiring US citizens becuase they pose a national defense risk to the energy sector. I don't think anyone has any animosity toward US citizens here either though, but I do think you'd find some if you went to a local pub.
If you can self employ (and find housing, but if you have cash from a FAANG job you can probably pay cash), the Dutch American Friendship Treaty is a popular choice.
For me, Copenhagen Atomics would be ideal.
Would you work in Europe for a 5 figure salary?
Median salary for a dev is about $130,000 according to https://www.prosa.dk/raad-og-svar/loenstatistik-2025 (assumes 37 hour work week, 5 weeks of vacation).
As a freelancer you can easily still earn 6 figures
Many people do!
Sure. Money isn't everything. A broader concern is that many european countries have similar problems like housing costs and a rising far-right without any better solution. And besides, these sky-high wages won't last for long with a state intent on isolating itself and starving its consumer base of wages.
Personally, I'm looking at east asia and latin america.
I think you have the causation wrong. The far right is rising mostly due to social media which is full of fake news and propaganda. People working at US tech companies nurture this "engagement" in order to get rich while poisoning our societies.
Well, that may be true, although I didn't intend to imply any causal relationship at all. My point is I don't see the general situation in Europe (or the anglosphere) as much improved, just.... less advanced.
In Europe they have an issue with the economic refugees from Muslim countries. And in Denmark has the counter example of Sweden where they cause trouble. That's why the far right gets people's votes. Of course, all they do is point to the migrants. The far right won't be solving any issues, it will just create new ones.
Why you feel the need to discuss a "far right" in Europe while US tech leadership is performing roman salutes in front of live cameras?
Muslim refugees are not responsible for Epstein, Greenland, US import duties, US ignoring Minsk agreement or Facebook actively supporting fake news with engineering resources embedded into political campaigns. The vast majority of muslim refugees integrates extremely well and perform shitty jobs that help our society, all while being traumatized from wars they were born into.
The social media accounts of the "far right" sit in st. petersburg propaganda mills and their advertisement account managers sit in san francisco. Workers at US-tech companies are responsible for the unchecked bombardment of our citizens with propaganda and fake news.
Are you suggesting that the AfD is not popular?
> Workers at US-tech companies are responsible for the unchecked bombardment of our citizens with propaganda and fake news.
They're also responsible for the propaganda and fake news targeting the center and the left. It just works most effectively to drive people right because of.... widely-distributed personality quirks, shall we say. It's not clear this dynamic would disappear if social media disappeared, but I do think it would slow down.
Dreadful weather but otherwise a nice country.
it would be so incredibly trumpian if he announces "Greencards For Greenland!"
surely, surely someone has already brainstormed it...
Only if you cough up enough green
I don’t think it will be a struggle for long. When you have a face to face meeting with your most powerful enemy and they tell you that they WILL conquer you (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/14/greenland-and-denma...), how can you stay coupled? This is going to accelerate the experiments started in Germany to move to open source software, etc. And I think Europe will pursue a heavy pivot to both grow local startups and couple to other powers like India or China.
At least for the next 50 years or so, the memory of this Trump administration will undermine any coupling to America. In the interim, I am not sure why these countries are even wasting time talking to American companies or representatives - they are absolutely not going to be a trustworthy long term partner:
> Rønde described the “Kafkaesque” experience of negotiating with local representatives who appear to have no actual authority.
I suspect there is going to be a flood of money in the EU for the creation of replacements for any US-based technology any of the EU countries are dependent upon (e.g., https://www.joindns4.eu). The real questions are whether there will be regulatory reform in the EU to facilitate this and will the money NOT flow to the usual dinosaurs. My impression is that Trump has sufficient pissed off EU governments such that there is some (small) hope for both. EC bureaucrats and MEPs might do well to read https://berthub.eu.
US tech workers believe their own lies and think they have some sort of magic sauce. For decades they've enjoyed government welfare and US-friendly regulation in many countries, which kept non-US competition small. An influx of non-US talent to US tech companies helped them stay innovative.
It is a courtesy that citizens from free countries pay US tech companies a middleman fee over various ways. What US tech workers fail to realize is that
So many of these things were done due to convenience and convention, making US tech workers richer and richer. I feel people are realizing what kind of pricks not only the management of US tech companies but also the US tech workers themselves are. Especially on HN these affluent workers from US tech companies run around and parrot the most stupid talking points while thinking their wealth comes from some sort of special skill.We made them rich. They looted our data and poisoned our societies with fake news. They show no respect towards our systems or culture.
What also has been true the whole time is that nobody has been stopping companies in other countries from creating social media sites, electronic wallets, movie streaming, operating systems, image hosting, or food delivery services. You are right, creating these companies does not come from some special skills only found in the US. Not sure why you are mad at US for creating these services, especially because, like you said, nobody is forcing you to use them. And nobody in the US is going to be upset if an EU company creates a new fun or convenient web service.
“And nobody in the US is going to be upset if an EU company creates a new fun or convenient web service.”
You were pretty pissed when the Chinese made a better social media app.
Maybe is because of your deep love of democracy and freedom, but it more likely that you can’t countenance not being in charge.
If you think we are pissed about someone making a fun short video scrolling app then why have so many Americans downloaded it?
What our government is concerned about is that China does not allow big social media tech companies access to their markets, so allowing Chinese social media companies access to US markets is unfair, and a legitimate social influence concern. Of course you already know this if you are from Europe, given the myriad of restriction you guys have on tiktok.
But you are right, we do walk around wringing our fists that Spotify is dominating music streaming, going goddamnit we don't even like music but something should be done.
I recommend you read "careless people", the book about Facebook, where it is documented that Facebook illegally installed spyware alongside the Facebook app on the smartphones of their users. They monitored the apps their users where running alongside Facebook, which allowed Facebook to not only monitor all competitors but also see the rise of WhatsApp, which ultimately led to the "surprise" acquisition of WhatsApp.
Not to mention that Facebook and Google unknowingly ingested phone contact lists from smartphones of their users on a massive scale. So their "advantage" was extremely unethical behavior, which today would be considered an illegal crime.
So yes, it is literally Apple and Google stopping my European company to do the same, because they make it really hard to leech user data from their platforms.
> nobody is forcing you to use them
Do you remember internet.org? There's an interesting section in "careless people" about how Zuckerberg was working on bundling Facebook with smartphone contracts so people can use it for free. One country rolled out Facebook for free and it resulted in the Rohingyan Genocidg because Facebook enabled unchecked fake news along religious divides, while over years ignoring all warnings about the problem.
Facebook caused genocide... Ok man. And BMW, Mercedes, Bosch, Siemens, VW, Zeiss, Fiat, etc. were responsible for genocide during WW2. But this is all completely off topic.
> Apple and Google stopping my European company to do the same, because they make it really hard to leech user data from their platforms.
I cant tell if you are for or against collecting user data.
If it's any consolation US startups have to compete with existing US companies too. Also it doesn't hurt to work with them instead of against them. Some European companies are getting quite rich from such relationships. Arm is making a killing off Apple. Ayden gets paid every time you order an Uber. Google licenses Nokia and Ericsson technologies. I'm sure there are many other examples.
The problem is that convenience trumps everything.
The golden cage of convenience is why nothing will change in the US -- we prize convenience above all else.Sorry to be blunt, but it is extremely inconvenient to be force-exposed to internal politics of some religious shithole country which twice votes against their own interests. Where people don't believe in healthcare but accept school shootings. Where society cares about body positivity until Ozempic arrives. A country which talks bigly about geopolitics and ignores agreements they have signed.
It is inconvenient to buy a Tesla to help save the planet and then see emerald nepo baby Elon Musk doing hitler salutes, and US citizens downplaying it due to their special understanding of freedom of speech.
Or a sweaty Peter Thiel morphing from startup evangelist to religious nut babbling about the antichrist.
Or a Jeff Bezos who ships stuff from china to europe being so unhappy with his life that he needs to marry the wife of his neighbor.
On top of this there's this still unresolved child sexual abuse scandal that basically implicates all of US upper class including senior leadership of US tech companies, who suddenly come out of retirement like Sergey Brin because they keep being mentioned in the Epstein files.
For more and more non-US people the inconvenience of seeing all this outweighs the benefit of being able to use some sort of web application. We have survived before on Nokia phones and TomTom navigation systems, and we'll be able to do so again.
US tech companies had US government support and helpful non-US regulatory environment to capture value from our countries. In their core, they are rent-seeking middlemen, parasitic to our economies.
The parasite needs a host, but the host can always find a new parasite.
You don't need it, but you want it, which is why you buy it. The vast majority of the economies of all post-industrial nations are dedicated not to needs, but wants. And convenience is one of the biggest ones. Go ahead, call me a prick, but you're a good customer, and I know you'll keep buying. We didn't loot your data. You gave it freely in exchange for the extremely convenient services that are built on it. You can go ahead and not use Google Maps next time you need to get somewhere you don't know the route. You can buy a map book and put it in your car and navigate the old way. But we both know you won't.
It is also a courtesy that free countries respect US copyright. I wouldn't be surprised if EU countries have already started ramping up corporate espionage and are making contingency plans to seize all data and assets on their territory. If they manage to get ahold of source code and data, they may be able to keep some services running without US involvement.
Netflix is a good example: the functionality isn't difficult to reproduce, and the only thing that restricts its library is copyright, which the EU could just stop enforcing for American companies.
> It is also a courtesy that free countries respect US copyright
Which, itself, is downstream of the US signing onto the Berne convention. American copyright actually used to be reasonable and (western) Europe was the insane one with life terms. All that is ugly about the US was buried so deeply in Europe that it is outside, here, with us.
Then America had the extremely short-sighted idea to assign copyright to software, and then use software to enforce copyright, and then make it independently illegal to tell anyone how to bypass that enforcement software. This was all then foisted back onto Europe, whose creative industries begged them for it, not knowing that it basically meant surrendering to the US before the war had even started.
Seizing American copyright would be a good start, but what you really want is to drop anti-circumvention law. Because that's the first domino[0] in the chain. Europe is chock full of businesses that would absolutely fall in line around a tyrant king just like American businesses have, and laws like that enable such businesses to exist.
[0] https://pooper.fantranslation.org/@kmeisthax/110771126221131...
> We made them rich. They looted our data and poisoned our societies with fake news. They show no respect towards our systems or culture.
And yet everyone and their dog in Europe has an iPhone.
Investment would be great, but the tech already exists. From Suse linux, hetzner, fairphone, to LibreOffice and OnlyOffice.
One simply needs to start using them. Investment can be focused on integration work and bug fixing.
My tax money is on the fact that it's going to go again to the dinosaurs. I cannot see them do any quick and adaptive change in the short term.
I can see ways that could be really effective, though trying to get a sane word out to these bureaucrats nowadays seems impossible.
I just can't see it happening. The United States benefits from decades of compounding advantages compared to the EU: elite research universities, talent pipelines, mature capital markets, and tons of integrated industries (fintech).
This is obvious in the recent AI race. EU-headquartered companies remain rare compared to their US/Chinese counterparts.
All true, but incomplete: you are not discounting these advantages with plain old 'industrial inertia'.
Some stuff just went goes to the USA, because it always went to the USA - even though the original advantages are long gone.
Screw with it enough and the users (the world) just route around the damage.
As the UK can attest after Brexit.
AI race is a very good example, because Microsoft customers in the EU pay significantly increased Microsoft license fees so that Microsoft can give that money to OpenAI. Without Microsoft having non-US customers as a cash cow the AI valuations would not be anywhere where they are today. In return non-US Microsoft customers get a useless copilot slapped into all UIs and have to throw away all their computers and buy new ones just because of Windows 11 software update.
The other things you list are weak arguments:
I think the delusion among US tech workers is immense. The moat is not that big. If other countries stop sharing your idea of copyright and software patents there is not much you can do.The problem: you just listed all of the things under attack by the current administration.
NATO allies like Germany are sending troops to protect their ally nation along with Denmark. This isn’t a fight Trump is prepared for. If he somehow decides to move forward - we are all going to have to face a hard choice.
As much as I think US annexation of Greenland would be the single worst foreign policy move of my lifetime, and maybe in US history, the US military is not the one who isn't prepared for that fight.
I never said the military isn’t up for it. I said Trump and his administration aren’t.
I know our military is full of ego and testosterone and they’ll fight anyone.
As a spectator from neither continent, I feel Trump is being a bit of a wuss.
He should give into his vices, embrace his inner-Putin and demand a “land-bridge” from Washington State to Alaska.
For national security reasons, of course.
It's not that hard to create your own search engine, office suite, and school ecosystem. I mean, no single one of google's services isn't replaceable, especially if a country sets its mind to it. Just do that if you're worried about it.
Building it is easy , selling , adopting and migrating to it is hard