If it was me that deal would have never came to be. If some EU entity decides to use Microsoft 365 can Microsoft guarantee that it won't give access to one US government agency or another? It really can't. Because if that EU entity wants to act in accordance with EU law, this matters. This is what that deal was for. Basically the EU saying "it is okay" although it never really was okay.
IMO we in the EU need to finally start doing our own stuff that adheres to our own laws and isn't subject to the whims of a mad king. Public Money, Public Code.
The treaties and deals he has managed to torpedo by forcing courts to uphold privacy laws is insane (and impressive).
It is not reporting on an opinion of a representative or proxy of the European Commission.
These decisions are known as Schrems I and Schrems II after the founder of this advocacy group.
The newest version of that data transfer framework is called the Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework. The European Commission deemed it sufficient, in no small part because they considered it (and more specifically the Data Protection Review Court, an extrajudicial executive branch tribunal) sufficiently independent of the president.
However, in January 2025, Trump fired the Democrat members of the review court, leaving it unable to reach quorum to make decisions, which highlighted it wasn't all that independent. Now it's clearly not independent.
I don't see how a Schrems III is not in the works.
Maybe that is because there are US companies competing in the same space that are not held to the same regulations because of treaties like this one. It's hard to build a competitor to AWS, not just technically (although it very much is), but also business-wise - who would choose the unproven startup if you can go with the accepted best practise? By forcing US companies to equal footing, you give European startups more of chance. (Which is a Chinese playbook, too.)
Sure, no dispute here—I agree that in general, the EU has recently being making it more difficult for large American tech companies to do business in Europe.
But I don't think that that applies at all in this specific case. The EU has already been sued twice over US–EU data-sharing agreements, and both times, they fought it all the way to their supreme court, and after they lost, they quickly made new agreements that were essentially equivalent to the old ones. So the EU repeatedly gone to a lot of effort to allow US–EU data-sharing, which suggests that their priorities are the exact opposite of forbidding this.
> And the hilarious, (IMO) bad faith downvoting suggests the comment actually stings. We must ask why.
I can't speak for the others, but I personally downvoted your comment because the sentence that I quoted was factually incorrect. I don't agree with your other points, but they seem like valid opinions, so I wouldn't have downvoted for those alone.
(And FWIW, I'm Canadian, so I have no vested interests in either side here)
Don't dig yourself further into that hole by slinging "bad faith" around willy nilly.
epsteingpt•1h ago
The withdrawal from the 'best available and aligned' markets will ultimately lead Europe to swallow its own tail tech-wise.
Socially, Europe does not seem capable of adequately addressing its populations' needs. Youth unemployment is tragically high across nearly the entire bloc. Look at what happens to countries with high youth unemployment.
Meanwhile, the EU decides that its most important issue is adjudicating whether a Supreme Court ruling will prevent its citizens from using Instagram.
josephg•1h ago
If NVIDIA can't sell GPUs to China, will that marginalise chinese technology? Or will it help supercharge a local industry? It might do both - hobbling chinese AI in the short term, but helping chinese competitors emerge in the medium to long term. US tariffs are the same. They might "marginalise" the US economy. But maybe they'll revitalise the US manufacturing industry too? We'll see!
The EU has a tremendous number of smart software engineers. They're more than capable of recreating the US technology stack locally. Especially with the benefit of hindsight, and with access to opensource software. In the long run, I wouldn't be surprised if Europe ended up richer by building their own tech stack "in house" instead of outsourcing to US hyperscalers.
epsteingpt•1h ago
People weaponizing the downvote here without good faith discussion is disappointing but expected on HN recently. It's OK, you can take my HN points.
> The EU has a tremendous number of smart software engineers. Yes.
> They're more than capable of recreating the US tech stack locally.
No.
Where are the dozens of European tech winners? Seriously. They have the best education system in the world, strong social safety nets, cheap healthcare, and great lifestyles. Why have they not created innovative technologies that turn into worldbeating companies?
It's worth seriously asking this question. Many serious tech companies ultimately move to the U.S. because of capital availability but this should be addressable no? EU has big banks and pools of capital?
The ball has been there to take for 30-40 years. Europe has not consistently manufactured winners in the tech space.
> Opensource Let's see. We hope. But this doesn't seem to have been a good strategy in Web 1 or Web 2 besides a couple of notable exceptions. But notable exceptions don't power an economy.
> Europe ends up richer I don't see how. This is the problem. They cannot build. They don't have the raw materials. The land. The labor supply. The power. This is getting closer to the root cause.
Have spent many years in Europe. Rooting for them.
Just not sure they will figure it out.
josephg•10m ago
This is a great question. I'm Australian, and I ask myself the same question constantly here in Aus. The engineers I graduated with in Sydney are easily as good as the engineers I worked with in the Bay Area. But where are all the startups?
Having worked in Aus and SF, I think the two big elements are culture and finance. We don't have a culture in Aus of risktaking and entrepreneurship. People just seem less interested here in changing the world by starting a tech company. If you do start a business, you're kind of on your own. There isn't a community of people who've done it before who can guide you. And there isn't the same sort of venture capital here. Lenders only want to make sure bets. There's money for low risk, low yield lending. But there are barely any funds for high risk, high yield. The successful tech startups I know in australia bootstrapped themselves (Fastmail, Atlassian).
As far as I can tell, Europe has the same problems. Europe has capital, but I don't think that capital it looking to make angel investments.
But maybe cutting ties with the US tech scene would help change that? So long as Google Docs works well, nobody is clamouring to make or fund a competitor. But take google docs away, and suddenly there's a clear need and a chance to make a lot of money. That could spur innovation.
gucci-on-fleek•1h ago
The EU hasn't decided or prioritized anything here yet. NOYB has decided that this issue is important, but they're a non-profit organization that is completely unrelated to any government. NOYB will eventually take this issue to the EU courts, but the courts are independent of the other branches of government, and are required to adjudicate any valid complaint, so regardless of what their ruling is, you can't really attribute that to "the EU" either.
epsteingpt•57m ago
If you have watched the EU's approach to U.S. tech cos (DMA, DPA) you can see a trend of increased regulation; to where it's not worth sometimes to release apps on the App Store initially to the EU due to GDPR and DMA restrictions.
Appreciate it if you take the technical bite out of the comment and engage in good faith here.
The regulators have repeatedly shown their willingness to look at the pure letter of the law and levy multibillion dollar fines.
Maybe the tech cos deserve it. But what's at hand here is where the investment of time and energy is going in the bloc.
My other comments address why this feels like an issue.
And the hilarious, (IMO) bad faith downvoting suggests the comment actually stings. We must ask why.
watwut•46m ago
DMA has nothing to do with small apps.
epsteingpt•36m ago
claw-el•1h ago
epsteingpt•1h ago
Source: worked with EU regulators on privacy.
bestouff•1h ago
croes•1h ago
DPA is exactly the USP where EU companies can beat US companies. So your point is the EU should kill European jobs in favor of Instagram.
BTW the best available and align markets are the reason for this
https://abcnews.com/US/wisconsin-man-dies-after-inhaler-cost...
epsteingpt•47m ago
-> More people have died in the EU from heat waves due to lack of air conditioning than gun violence in the US. Ratio is worse if you remove suicide gun death.
Societal choices do have consequences!
The EU doesn't have to kill jobs. The companies are doing that on their own because they cannot compete. Take a look at what is happening in Germany.
The whole point is the EU should be more competitive. It would be great if they could create jobs instead of giving them to Instagram.
That's what everyone wants. No one wants to live in the 9/9/6 grind hellscape.
But you cannot regulate the world there. EU has tried. It has not worked.
This is only a clear-eyed assessment.