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?

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.

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.

> He's basically saying journalism is a matter of National Security

But it is paid by the CIA and US (_witb CIA_) is our friend.

Maybe instead of _saying_ he shall _act_. But yes, i know, he's a politician.

Your making an argument that Denmark should take over control of Silicon Valley as a matter of their national security. I can see a win-win scenario emerging: Denmark controls Silicon Valley saving their journalists (and possibly the world) while Trump gets rid of leftish distractors plus takes control of Greenland getting a infinitly large piece of land with hugh growth potential for golf places once the ice has melted.

"We need journalism to be done 'correctly' as a matter of national security" sounds like something that the CCP would say.

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.

Well in our case what it does is mostly get in the way of building things

"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'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.

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.

>"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.

> 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.

> 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

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.

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.)

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?

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".

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.

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.

“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.

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.

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.

> 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...

> Go ahead, call me a prick, but you're a good customer, and I know you'll keep buying.

Your overconfidence might set you up for disappointment, just like those US states who are begging Canadians to buy their booze. I understand that you're emotional, and it's fine - no need to call anyone a prick.

> We didn't loot your data. You gave it freely in exchange for the extremely convenient services that are built on it.

That's incorrect. Both Facebook and Google uploaded smartphone contact books of their users to their servers when it still was possible. There was no user consent to provide list of all contacts plus phone numbers. Now both have walled gardens and fight against other companies scraping their data.

> You can buy a map book and put it in your car and navigate the old way.

There are many other options.

It's a weak argument that Europeans are legally bound to forever buy iPhones "designed in california" because they used to buy them in the past.

Other US companies like Tesla massively lost market share already, whole US states are begging for Canadians to buy booze.

In light of current crises created by the US, why do you think it goes any different for the rest of the US tech companies? The goodwill is used up.

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.

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.