- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
Google has criticized the European Union’s intentions to achieve digital sovereignty through open-source software. The company warned that Brussels’ policies aimed at reducing dependence on American tech companies could harm competitiveness. According to Google, the idea of replacing current tools with open-source programs would not contribute to economic growth.
Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs and chief legal officer, warned of a competitive paradox that Europe is facing. According to the Financial Times, he said that creating regulatory barriers would be harmful in a context of rapid technological advancement. His remarks came just days after the European Commission concluded a public consultation assessing the transition to open-source software.
Google’s chief legal officer clarified that he is not opposed to digital sovereignty, but recommended making use of the “best technologies in the world.” Walker suggested that American companies could collaborate with European firms to implement measures ensuring data protection. Local management or servers located in Europe to store information are among the options.
The EU is preparing a technological sovereignty package aimed at eliminating dependence on third-party software, such as Google’s. After reviewing proposals, it concluded that reliance on external suppliers for critical infrastructure entails economic risks and creates vulnerabilities. The strategy focuses not only on regulation but also on adopting open-source software to achieve digital sovereignty.
According to Google, this change would represent a problem for users. Walker argues that the market moves faster than legislation and warns that regulatory friction will only leave European consumers and businesses behind in what he calls “the most competitive technological transition we have ever seen.” As it did with the DMA and other laws, Google is playing on fear. Kent Walker suggested that this initiative would stifle innovation and deny people access to the “best digital tools.”
The promotion of open-source software aims to break dependence on foreign suppliers, especially during a period of instability caused by the Trump administration. The European Union has highlighted the risks of continuing under this system and proposes that public institutions should have full control over their own technology.
According to a study on the impact of open-source software, the European Commission found that it contributes between €65 billion and €95 billion annually to the European Union’s GDP. The executive body estimates that a 10% increase in contributions to open-source software would generate an additional €100 billion in growth for the bloc’s economy.
You must log in or # to comment.
European administration offices don’t need the best technologies in the world, they just need a freakin office program they can trust…
Drug dealer critizises addict’s intention to get clean.
It means we’re doing something right.
Funny considering how much of Google was built on open software.
Exactly. Open source is fine when it suits them but not fine when it doesn’t.
This is why GNU GPL is very importand.
Here the GNU GPL comes to the rescue. The programmer shows the boss that this proprietary software product would be copyright infringement, and the boss realizes that he has only two choices: release the new code as free software, or not at all. Almost always he lets the programmer do as he intended all along, and the code goes into the next release. ref
To me it feels like there’s two Googles. The one that was run by Page and Brin was awesome, pretty much everyone in the industry wanted to work there.
Then they put someone else in charge to maximise shareholder revenue, and it went to shit soon after.
Public companies will always become so. They were only good because they were in the growth phase, the internet is not in the growth phase any longer, a few corporations control the gates to any industry, internet or what have you, and are squeezing everyone else.
Our wages go down every year in value as real inflation is higher than the cpi, while investors increase their margins at our expense. And we are too dumb to know it, trusting them, even now.
MoRe OpTiOnS iS bAd FoR cOmPeTiTiOn
competition is bad for competition
checks out
translation: having more competitors harms our chance of winning against them
The company warned that Brussels’ policies aimed at reducing dependence on American tech companies could harm competitiveness.
Just what I’d expect a monopoly to say.
Fuck you. Alphabet.
Increased competition from open source alternatives harms competitiveness? By forcing them to compete and maybe actually innovate?
They mean it would harm their competitiveness.
As in, “We’d be less competitive if you switch to a competitor” (in this case FOSS).
I’ve reached the point in my life where I find this more arousing than booba
But not vagne?
But also:
Google is still up 100% from where it was may last year, even taking that drop into account.
maybe Google, but Microslop and Amazon;
Ohh, beautiful!
Maybe we should short the shit out of these arseholes as they go down.
“well yes you actually need to stay dependent on us to be competitive” -fucking ridiculous
According to the Financial Times, he said that creating regulatory barriers would be harmful in a context of rapid technological advancement.
Are we in a context of rapid technological advancement ? I would say we are in a context of dire technological stagnation.
«AI» is a mirage that is utterly failing at pretty much everything it is applied to, and in every other domain I would say tech progress is coming to a halt now that our new feudal lords have conquered so much of the market.
This push by the EU is, apart from digital sovereignty, a very necessary push to get some innovation going again. I hope more complementary measures will follow ; we really need hardware sovereignty as well.
It probably refers to advances in AI-driven surveillance on behalf of the US Government.
“Drug dealer criticizes drug user’s plan to quit.”
The British came to China with warships when the Chinese government wanted to ban Opium. So I wouldn’t expect anything else from these crapitalists.
Crapitalists.
Excellent, thank you 😁!
deleted by creator
Car company complains that city is developing Metro system.
Google can fuck itself.
It’s worth saying again: Google can fuck itself.
And I generally like Google’s products. But they make plenty of money off of my data to say: Fuck Google.
Thanks for confirming we’re on the right track, google.
Remember, whenever you see a patently weak argument like this from a trillion dollar corporation, they’re not saying it because they think anyone will believe it. They’re saying it to give the corrupt politicians in their pocket some way to pull a straight face when voting in the corporation’s favour.
We saw already tech paying off the US to bully europe into backing off of their previous demands and controls on tech. Europe has bad leadership, they backed off, and surrendered all last year to the US administration, there is no reason to think they won’t this time after google pays them off to do it again.
Europe is too busy trying to bring in the trojan horses of age checks and chatcontrol behind the gates to worry about protecting from tech, but rather to cooperate with tech to subjugate their citizens to secret social scores to determine winners and losers in life, with peter thiel and his ilk doing the deciding. The UK is already most of the way there, and the rest of europe is trying to follow, over and over and over. They only need to win once, the defenders of liberal democracy need to win every time.
Europe needs real leadership pushing popular reform. They will fall to fascists in league with the US that will fix their elections too on their current course of status quo mainstream politics with the far right as the only real reform option.
We give them reform, or nazis will, those are the only two choices, and the starmers and macrons of the world still don’t know it or don’t care.
the idea of replacing current tools with open-source programs would not contribute to economic growth.
Wrong.
creating regulatory barriers would be harmful in a context of rapid technological advancement
Wrong.
Walker suggested that American companies could collaborate with European firms
What does he not understand about digital sovereignty?
According to Google, this change would represent a problem for users
No, for Google. Also, wrong.
that the market moves faster than legislation and warns, that regulatory friction will only leave European consumers and businesses behind in what he calls “the most competitive technological transition we have ever seen.”
If that’s the price to avoid technofaschism… And, again, wrong.
Tl;dr: stop wanking, Walker.
I don’t know if he believes his own made up BS here, but these are some really idiotic statements. I’m glad the EU is taking steps to not use infrastructure created by a fascist government. At this point I don’t think there’s a reason to distinguish FANG (and their friends) from the government seeing how buddy buddy they all are with each other.
This is like a “no shit Google doesn’t want this” which makes moving over to the Euro style even better. Everyone opposed to what huge tech corporations are doing (should be everyone) should see this as a sign that you should make the change.
He doesn’t.
They lie and thieve.
