Even if you can’t move all of it now the basic building blocks like VMs and databases aren’t exactly cutting edge tech so should be doable.
replies(2):
As far as cloud goes, how many shops are now looking at bringing stuff back in because eventually cloud maximizes its profit margins and captured clients can't say no to ever increasing prices. I imagine leaving the US-owned cloud also means an opportunity to reconfigure what is on the cloud and if it needs to be there.
Here's hope desktop linux comes back into play.
As for Munich moving back to windows, who knows how much of that was 'checkbook diplomacy' of the USA demanding they go back to US products or the US will pull unrelated support or whatever. Now that the USA has become isolationist, if not a threat to the EU, those favors/checks aren't being cashed anymore. So much of this is not a meritocracy but instead the crony capitalism that defines the modern world. Maybe there's potential for actual merit now that the USA is losing global prominence in so many ways.
The EU liberated from US influence can lead to great things and this is a good start. For all the doom and gloom of politics today, the US's century of influence ending can only be a universally good thing, imho.
But for global stability it’s best if there was some kind of entity with a legitimate monopoly on force. It’s like I don’t want to live in a town where everyone has guns, I’d like a police force with accountability.
Being defenseless hoping an angry 800lbs gorilla will be kind to you must be the worst system imaginable. A balance of power both economic and arms is going to be the best way forward because now that gorilla knows it can't just do what it wants anymore.
Ideally idk I'd like a much stronger UN or something, with federal power over member states.
And don’t forget, regardless of the title, for anything to get done there inevitably is one man who is making decisions/breaking ties somewhere.
I can’t think of anyone that the various factions could actually trust to do that without screwing over at least (or more!) half of them.
What happens when the person who chose them is in Beijing, and everyone in my entire country doesn’t want them there? But they still got a global majority?
Typically that’s the kind of thing a lot of people die over.
The only way a real UN would work is with even more violence. The ‘under the boot forever’ type.
The world would need a Qin to have even half a chance [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qin_Shi_Huang].
Because what happens - when like the US is now discovering - the courts are useless? And you don’t even have your own guns to protect your rights?and what someone else has decided to do is your destruction?
Americans have some very weird thinking over guns. I think if they were taken away, they'd have to work harder at getting along with other people (esp women, minorities, china), and therefore get better at it.
It's really not a coincidence that it's the pro-gun Americans who killed Roe v Wade. Their ancestors owned slaves. They love to say it's about "rights", but it's clearly not.
It doesn’t surprise me that those capable (and willing!) of defending themselves would rugpull everyone else if it gave them what they wanted.
What surprises me is how everyone else sits back and lets them and refuses to actually take action to defend themselves, while going ‘woe is me, why won’t anyone do something’.
And acting surprised that the people they’ve been screaming are going to do bad things actually do bad things.
It’s embarrassing. Just like you are apparently advocating for a dictator to ‘save us’, from…. ourselves? Or something?
At least the Trumpers are transparently doing it for personal gain, near as I can tell you’re just doing it for some kind of do gooder fantasy? They tend to be even worse, in practice.
And for the record I'm advocating something like a worldwide federal system. You think that's a dictatorship because that's how your mind works. There are hundreds of good examples, but you tunnel vision on two exceptions. Nothing I can do about that bit of damage except to move on from this conversation.
‘Move to Europe’ isn’t a political solution for the US.
And right now we have clear examples of a US federal gov’t trying to stomp on state and city level rights - which is why we are talking? And a historical civil war, where one group imposed rules on the other.
Which of course is going to happen if you have diverse economies and ideas of what is acceptable and try to weld them together under one government. Which is what you are proposing.
What do you think is going to happen if you try to get Egypt, China, Russia, France, Brazil, USA, India, etc. to actually have a common set of enforced rules?
And in both the Russian and Chinese ‘federal systems’ it’s absolutely expected they will.
The EU is the only one I can think of where there isn’t a common military - for example - and that one is far from proving the test of time.