SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On tech, the EU doesn't speak for Europe:
The European Commission of President Ursula von der Leyen vowed in 2019 to make "a Europe fit for the digital age," dubbing the 2020s Europe's "digital decade."
Building on the European Union's flagship privacy law, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Brussels's regulatory race to the top gained historic momentum over the past four years. And from digital markets to content moderation, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, computer chips and data governance, the Commission has left little on the table in terms of regulation.
Bolstered by mended ties with the administration of United States President Joe Biden and increased coordination with the U.S. through the Trade and Technology Council (TTC), the von der Leyen Commission seems to have achieved the impossible in an often rancorous 27-member bloc — a unified Europe around a common digital agenda.
But this narrative of unity obfuscates a much more complex reality in which the Commission's policies are dominated by its two largest — and most zealously regulatory — countries: France and Germany. In fact, Europe's smaller but most tech-oriented members rarely feel heard in the halls of Brussels, even as they often disagree with the Commission's agenda.
Privately, officials from these countries say the Commission's strategy will hamper innovation by imposing complex compliance rules on smaller companies that can't afford to implement them. They also worry that foreign investment — particularly from U.S. investors, which are responsible for a whopping 76 percent of foreign investment in European tech companies — will wane as the Commission goes after large American tech firms. And many lament that Brexit took away the United Kingdom's counterbalancing voice, leaving a vacuum for France and Germany to fill.
While these concerns are rarely aired publicly, simply put, Central and Northern Europe know that when it comes to tech, the EU doesn't speak for Europe.
And no wonder: None of the EU's major institutions — the Commission, the European Council or the European Parliament — have Central Europeans at the helm, even as the power balance in Europe shifts eastward after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Proportional representation in the Parliament also means that the largest countries — France, Germany and Italy — have the most power in terms of votes. Even if all the Nordic, Baltic and Central European countries voted as a block — which they don't — they would still have fewer votes (191) than just France, Germany and Italy (251).
As a result, smaller countries then need to prioritize focusing on the most critical issues — defense and security — and the Parliament's ability to set Europe's tech agenda is then hamstrung by the Commission's sole power to propose legislation.
But just as the power balance on defense and deterrence is shifting to the east and north, so are the economic headwinds when it comes to tech innovation and investment.
For example, Helsinki, Stockholm and Tallinn have higher growth rates for capital invested in startups than London, Munich and Paris. And while unicorns — or firms valued at $1 billion or more and are still predominantly privately owned — in Western Europe still raise nearly double the amount of money as those in "new Europe," the latter has the highest valuation-to-investment ratio on the Continent.
In short, tech companies in Central and Eastern Europe do more with less.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pe1rxq on Wednesday May 31 2023, @02:31PM (6 children)
The phase out of incandescent bulbs was not a fiasco due to the EU. It was a simply hampered by those that where making profit of them. And forcing them out by legislation is the only way that will be remotly successfull.
Besides, the article is written by two members of the same think-tank and even they have to admit the 'non-German, non-French' part of the EU is anything but unified on such issues anyway.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday May 31 2023, @10:53PM
Now what's the case for forcing out incandescent light bulb manufacturers? The poor justification for the heavy-handed use of force is a large part of the reason this fiasco is a fiasco. It wasn't those manufacturers who did that.
(Score: 2) by garfiejas on Saturday June 03 2023, @11:40PM (4 children)
Most of my mouse is now LED; it wasn't the phasing them out, though they cost pennies and as a consequence I have a lifetimes supply which I'll be able to hand down to my grandchildren... none of of the UK or even EU political parties had it as a manifesto commitment - the speed and the massive cost/safety issues with their (then) replacements, would/could usually mean I wrote to my MP to get off their behinds and do something or join a political party and possibly/eventually get the King to sign into the thousand year or so old law books - still - backed up onto vellum. The issue was - as you point out - an economic one - "imposed" by the EU Commission - the only law-proposing-creating body across the EU - its not democratic/accountable in any way - and the law could not then be changed by any "political" means - something at least here in the UK, I understood (naively) to have ended back in the 1640's with the Civil War (200000+ dead); so while "light bulbs" were the poster-boy for the way this was going - what next - spinning rust (majority of a DC power usage) - electric kettles, crt monitors - pray they don't change the deal any further?
(Score: 2) by pe1rxq on Sunday June 04 2023, @08:26AM (3 children)
The EU commision not democratic? That one again?
The members of the commision are elected by the Parliament. The other voters probably did not agree with you (no party has a majority) but it is democratic.
(Score: 2) by garfiejas on Wednesday June 07 2023, @08:34AM (2 children)
Yes, that one again; they are "vetted" by the EU Parliament - drawn up from lists by member states - https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/7/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed [europa.eu]
Are the commissioners elected by a direct popular mandate? No; they are selected for "knowing the subjects they're appointed for";
That doesn't look like any democracy, in fact it looks very similar to the UK House of Lords... part of the executive; except these folk in the UK are there to review, accept & modify laws proposed by the UK Parliament - not the other way around
(Score: 2) by pe1rxq on Wednesday June 07 2023, @08:50PM (1 child)
Are you by any change one of those who want a referendum about every fart a government employee wants to release?
(Score: 2) by garfiejas on Thursday June 08 2023, @01:01PM
No, just one who wants the "will of the people" making the rules - not unelected - unaccountable and highly biased technocrats - not that those rules may be any good - or consistent or even legal in common-law - they may not know; that's the role of unelected, unaccountable and potentially highly biased technocrats - i.e it would be called, oh I don't know - the civil service... and an apology not a snide remark would have been nice.