Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

50% Positive

Analyzed from 1803 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#where#government#dutch#power#civil#always#servants#microsoft#european#politicians

Discussion (60 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

petcat•about 2 hours ago
> However, stopping working with Microsoft and other US tech companies is not an option in the short term, he told the magazine.

> Van der Burg is currently grappling with the issue of Solvinity, a Dutch cloud service provider which is widely used by government departments including the Digid identity system, and which is on the verge of being sold to a US company.

> The Dutch tax office is also currently switching to Microsoft systems, despite MPs’ concerns.

They all talk about the importance of European digital sovereignty and then continue to do the exact opposite behind the scenes.

microtonal•about 2 hours ago
They all talk about the importance of European digital sovereignty and then continue to do the exact opposite behind the scenes.

To be honest and I say this as a Dutch person, this is typical Dutch (government). Basically two rules in Dutch politics: (1) always choose the option that pleases the US the most; (2) always postpone solving issues to the latest possible moment (US dependence, nitrogen deposition, childcare benefits scandal, gas-induced earthquakes).

France, Germany, etc. are much better examples when it comes to sovereignty.

As an aside the parliament wants to stop the Solvinity acquisition or stop renewing the contract with Solvinity. But the VVD (one of the parties in government) is always going to choose what is best for big business (the party is one big revolving door) or the US.

miohtama•about 2 hours ago
It's not only Dutch. Instead of building sovereignity, the EU thought they could regulate their way and force everyone to bend the knee because of their share as a trading partner. This started 20 years ago. However what has happened is that the EU's soft power is crumbling, but the politicians have hard to grasp with the reality they could somehow dictate things globally. AI will only further accelerate this.

Only way to have control is to have domestic actors you can push around.

graemep•44 minutes ago
Europeans (and not just the EU) think they still have the influence on the world they had in the 1980s when their economies were a much larger proportion of the global economy. Europeans have no idea what the world looks like from Asia which contains most of the world's population and generates a third of global GDP.
jorvi•about 2 hours ago
> However what has happened is that the EU's soft power is crumbling

Uh, no. The US soft power is turning to dust whilst the EU is out there building the new free [trade] world, with itself as the biggest lynchpin.

What has happened the past ±30 years is that most EU countries cut spending on their militaries to the bone, because big brother USA would take care of it anyway. Now that we are returning to a multi-polar world, suddenly the EU is left scrambling for hard power that it doesn't have. That's why they can't play hardball when the US does a new ridiculous thing, because they simply lack the hard power to back up Ukraine.

The US is sorely going to regret their antics though. Long term, the EU is going to switch to their own stacks, both for military but also things like cloud and other tech. It's trillions of $ the US economy will be missing out on. And voting in a Democratic president, senate and house is not gonna change a thing about it, because the US has proven itself to be a fundamentally unreliable, if not outright hostile partner.

dgellow•about 1 hour ago
> always postpone solving issues to the latest possible moment

Germany has the exact same issue. Always looking to keep the status quo for as long as possible. It’s really a structural problem, it’s the result of the political system, elected leadership, demographics (mostly the voting population aging rapidly). I expect the same issue is shared by most Western European countries

embedding-shape•about 1 hour ago
Isn't this simply a "human thing", keeping the status quo for as long as possible? I see the same European country I'm from, where I'm living currently, the South American country my wife is from and every single country I visit.

Maybe another framing, is there any countries where this isn't true? Where truly the default is to go against the status quo and continuously improve no matter what? I know there are a few countries people think are like that, but when you start reading about it, turns out to be kind of "hyped" and not matching reality.

stingraycharles•about 1 hour ago
Don’t forget that they’re in the process of letting our digital government identity being managed by a US company. It’s absolutely ridiculous.
PowerElectronix•5 minutes ago
European politicians and bureaucrats are just full of shit and extremely unwilling to make any kind of effort beyond talking.
TrackerFF•about 1 hour ago
It takes time. Hence whey Microsoft has a stranglehold on big gov. customers in other countries.

From my own experience, big changes can take place in smaller gov. organizations, and pretty fast too. I've worked at a place where we swapped out all Microsoft and commercial products to open source alternatives in just a couple of weeks. But it was a smaller and specialized part of an organization, with 30 users.

Trying to do the same change, where there are millions of users involved? It will almost certainly take a decade or more.

The only thing that would accelerate such a process, would be Microsoft shutting down services at the command of, say, the US president. But that would only be the case if said country ended up being sanctioned by the US.

petcat•about 1 hour ago
> It takes time. [...] It will almost certainly take a decade or more.

> The Dutch tax office is also currently switching to Microsoft systems

They're not even trying though. They're not even starting the clock. They are actively going in the opposite direction.

It will never happen.

pjc50•about 2 hours ago
Rather like pre 2022 Russia, governments get warnings that something bad is going to happen that it would be expensive to prepare for, and put off preparing because you don't get political rewards for that.
skippyboxedhero•about 1 hour ago
The reason Germany didn't prepare for it was because multiple leading politicians were bought and paid for by Russia. Be totally clear about that. Former German president was working for Gazprom on the project whose stated aim was to facilitate an invasion of Ukraine at some point (which Trump pointed out, and EU politicians literally laughed at him).

The issue with the EU is that they lack the capacity for any kind of strategic thought. There are multiple reasons why but the underlying cause is that it is possible to move into local minimum where there is a very strong disincentive for any kind of change. Countries in the EU have generally been in that place since before the EU...that is why the EU was created, to limit change. It is isn't political incentives, it is a fundamental aspect of the political culture. If you also look at the stuff that has changed, this only becomes more strange (i.e. government intervention, immigration, regulations). Change is limited to preserve control.

bob001•about 1 hour ago
> The reason Germany didn't prepare for it was because multiple leading politicians were bought and paid for by Russia. Be totally clear about that. Former German president was working for Gazprom on the project whose stated aim was to facilitate an invasion of Ukraine at some point (which Trump pointed out, and EU politicians literally laughed at him).

To add to your point, despite this the German population seems to strongly believe there is no corruption in their government. Local minima, everything is fine, there is no fire, I'm going to make some tea while the tables turns to ash under the pot.

softwaredoug•about 2 hours ago
Ironically GOP talks about European sovereignty over their own defense, but economically want to treat them like a vassal
NoLinkToMe•36 minutes ago
This is by the way how the defense was treated for decades as well. US resisted the EU from building a formidable army, instead they preferred a vassal state defense, enough to deter others from messing with Europe, not enough for Europe to be independent, and buying almost exclusively from US defense companies propping up US military R&D and financing factories during peacetime.

Now that the US has pivoted to Asia since Obama, they expect the EU to fill the gap they leave behind. But that’s new, the US wanted it exactly like it was pre 2014 or so.

roenxi•about 1 hour ago
If you think about it in terms of game theory that is actually a fair approach - you have an ally, you propose a best-case path forward for the alliance where both members are strong. If the ally don't want to take that path then you exploit the ally instead since a technically incompetent ally is a liability who needs to be kept under tight control.
hulitu•about 1 hour ago
US tech companies pay well, the cost of living is increasing, so politicians have to think about the future.
spockz•about 2 hours ago
There are many different tracks underway in government in different branches. Completely vetoing everything to use Microsoft is a difficult decision as it also stops a lot of features that depend on it, or were made to depend on it, such as updating tax codes. Therefore it is a risk/benefit assessment rather than outright lying. (The latter also happens obviously but just wanted to state that reality is more gray than black and white.)
throwaw12•about 2 hours ago
Because there is no punishment for lying in politics.

Look at the Trump, connected to p*dos, instead of stopping wars, started a war, betrayed MAGA, but still no action taken against him, because there is no legal action for lying to become a politican

roysting•about 1 hour ago
Greed is the easiest way to compromise anything.

It is a central theme covered in too many sources to list, but it is always a deal with the figurative devil, treason, betrayal of not just oneself, but everyone else who trusted you, lifted you, and relied on you.

It is why treason is such a pernicious and evil act even when one is ignorant of perpetrating it, because you may personally advance your own position for a moment by making a deal with the devil, but the real price is always immeasurably greater.

It is also why no one hates the traitor more than the devil himself, because he knows best what a vile and untrustworthy traitor the person is that would betray his own people. Even the devil cannot even respect that, hence why the only thing one can be sure of when making a deal with the devil is that the devil and his children will always stab you in the back.

It is the existential question all of “the west” is wrestling with right now. Whether they can stop the traitors among them who have long ago made many deals with many devils and his many children…or will they personally “profit” in the short term all the way to figurative hell.

Eridrus•about 2 hours ago
I don't know what the US thinks it will gain by targeting civil servants. They are not the ones with the power to decide what happens, and retaliation would mean more anti-US people selecting themselves into these projects.
bob001•about 1 hour ago
> retaliation would mean more anti-US people selecting themselves into these projects.

Very few people are martyrs or want to become martyrs. Even fewer in places where life is generally fine and for a cause that isn't dire to their loved ones.

RenThraysk•24 minutes ago
They are not civil servants.

Similarly UK OfCom is a non governmental organisation, so not civil servants either.

tjpnz•32 minutes ago
Wasn't this one of the factors leading to the EU's new payments network?
emilfihlman•about 2 hours ago
>They are not the ones with the power to decide what happens

This is a very naive interpretation. Bureaucrats have MASSIVE amount of power and control, and in actuality decide many things and how the law is written.

jgalt212•about 1 hour ago
Yes, civil servants should be allowed to ply their trade without scrutiny.
icfly2•35 minutes ago
Yes, Dutch civil servants must not be supervised oder subjected to scrutiny of American law makers. That is sort of self evident.
miohtama•about 2 hours ago
These civil servants are effectively trying to bypass the US court. These civil servants yield considerable power what comes to the censorship, and the Whitehouse really really hates the idea that the EU can decide, not them, what is allowed. This will send a message that the US stands behind its companies and is not push around. If you want to push non-domestic enforcement, you need to be willing to stand behind the principles and be publicly ready to defend the censorship rulings you set forward.
pjc50•about 1 hour ago
> Whitehouse really really hates the idea that the EU can decide, not them, what is allowed

.. in the Netherlands. Where the EU and the Dutch government get to decide what happens. That's what national sovereignty means.

skippyboxedhero•about 1 hour ago
I would read the links in the article. The problem is that social media companies worked with civil servants in European countries to remove posts being made people outside Europe. This also happened in the UK where there were parts of the government that were able to make requests directly to social media companies to remove posts on their platform, regardless of where the poster was from.

For obvious reasons, the linked article does not explain that fully.

It is kind of weird to see the turnaround on here from people who complain about the US government being too powerful but, for some reason, are quite okay with an unelected EU bureaucrat being able to govern their internet usage. There are no principles at play here.

KnuthIsGod•about 1 hour ago
Europeans are virtually serfs of the US.
portly•about 1 hour ago
Sorry, but "dutchnews.nl" is not a source I take seriously. Please link a publication on an established media outlet because this smells like misinfo.
tgv•about 1 hour ago
emilfihlman•about 2 hours ago
Civil servant's info is public information (at least in Finland it is).

It's good that bureaucrats can't hide behind bureaucracy.