Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- USA has always seemed it's companies. Will they do the same they did with International Criminal Court? They were investigating Israel genocide and now they judges can't use a credit card or travel.
Reference: https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/icc-strongly-rejects-new-us-san...
by neves - Schleswig-Holstein works with sovereign tech for their office and email applications.by rambambram
- Censoring free speech is the end of democracy. We must fight back against government encroachment on our rights.by silexia
- The right to what, exactly? Extralegally hand over private PII to the government?
This article is not a censorship polemic.
by bigyabai - Civil servant's info is public information (at least in Finland it is).
It's good that bureaucrats can't hide behind bureaucracy.
by emilfihlman - They are afraid more of their own citizens thn of Americans. That's the reason for secrecy. At the same time, Danish officials push for chat control - a fascist Stasi-like initiative of mass spying on citizens, with a deliberate exception of government officials.
- As always is some countries and especially in European ones. When citizens have to face the consequence of harmful data mining and sharing behaviors, it is ok because the officials are profiting of it.
When it is the officials that have to bear the consequences, then it is scandalous and something needs to be done about it. But just for them to be protected. They don't care for the general population.
by greatgib - > Under the US Cloud Act, American companies are required to hand over all information they store to the government if requested to do so, even if it is stored abroad.
Hrm. It's my understanding that a US company is required to give almost no data to any government without a warrant.
by djoldman - True, but a US warrant. So if data is stored on a system in another country owned by an American company, they can be compelled to hand the information to the US government even if it is illegal to do so according to the law of the country where in the information is stored.
So, for example, a lot of medical information stored on AWS by the NHS could be obtained by the US government. So could a lot of financial and government data around the world. Zoom calls, Teams meetings, emails sent to GMail. Google Drive and one Drive document. Lots and lots more.
by graemep - The article is thin on details about the sharing of names. If US companies responded to US government inquiries about speech regulation by forwarding the emails they received from Dutch regulators, those would unsurprisingly include regulators' names.
The article title seems like click bait, even though the article content goes on to have interesting details about EU attempts to reduce dependence on US technology companies.
by zugi - How is it clickbait? They're describing the topic of the discussion in a transparent and accurate manner.by j_maffe
- > Companies such as Microsoft and Meta have shared the names of civil servants and academics working on European tech regulation with a senate committee investigating “tech censorship” or “jawboning”, news magazine Vrij Nederland reported on Friday.
IIRC this was part of subpoena from Congress?
> The cabinet has described the news as “extremely worrying”, given that the named officials could now face travel bans or even sanctions, Vrij Nederland said.
This is possible.
> “If you want to discuss policy, then you do it with us, not over the backs of civil servants,” digital economy minister Willemijn Aerdts told the magazine. “That has happened and we will now talk to our contacts, including those in the US.”
I don't know why they expect to be able to discuss policy constraints without the government of the company's place of business knowing.
by ronsor - > "I don't know why they expect to be able to discuss policy constraints without the government of the company's place of business knowing."
My interpretation of this quote would be that it is not liked that individual names are shared of people working in e.g. the competition authority. They are saying if you want to discuss things, come through the front door, i.e. contact the competition authority which maybe has an official government liaison and don't go after a person who is only responsible for writing some regulation.
by moontear - 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.by Eridrus
- 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.by miohtama
- Yes, civil servants should be allowed to ply their trade without scrutiny.by jgalt212
- We are currently in the process of exploiting all short term gains at the cost of long term stability.by joquarky
- Wasn't this one of the factors leading to the EU's new payments network?by tjpnz
- They are not civil servants.
Similarly UK OfCom is a non governmental organisation, so not civil servants either.
by RenThraysk - >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.
by emilfihlman - > 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.
by bob001 - > 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.
by petcat - US tech companies pay well, the cost of living is increasing, so politicians have to think about the future.by hulitu
- Ironically GOP talks about European sovereignty over their own defense, but economically want to treat them like a vassalby softwaredoug
- Bert Hubert makes an argument based on Palantir: it's not simply the software. It's like a million dollar a day marine crane which comes with a crew. To put it another way, Microsoft, Oracle, Salesforce licenses are a tax compared to what is spent on consultants and integrators. That army knows a particular tech stack and also the relevant players.by m3047
- European politicians and bureaucrats are just full of shit and extremely unwilling to make any kind of effort beyond talking.
- Indian tax departments use EXCEL VBA and force users to.use licensed microsoft excel to run the utilities so tax returns can be filed.
The reason given "for your own safety"
At the same time, the public tendering process makes no mention of the tools. The L1 uses excel and that inturn FORCES thousands and thousands into using paid excel.
I use masgrave but thats irrelevant. I also use libreoffice which works most of the time but yeah
by 2Gkashmiri - 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.
by TrackerFF - 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.by pjc50
- 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.
by microtonal