←back to thread

245 points CrankyBear | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.013s | source
Show context
mentalgear ◴[] No.45774588[source]
Why would ANY global business still rely on U.S. Tech? The U.S. government, through their executive orders and dissolving of the separations of powers, has demonstrated its ability to unilaterally disrupt or shut down private technology services at will. How can any business justify depending on U.S.-based tech infrastructure when its access could vanish overnight on a political whim by an unstable president?

If there is no rule of law, capital, talent and trust are flowing out of that country - for good reason.

replies(10): >>45774792 #>>45774835 #>>45774906 #>>45775034 #>>45775182 #>>45775184 #>>45775281 #>>45775442 #>>45776349 #>>45778742 #
mrtksn ◴[] No.45775442[source]
> Why would ANY global business still rely on U.S. Tech?

Because it's pretty refined since it was funded with resources so great that it was intended to serve global level audience?

I don't believe that EU will have comparable quality "tech" without restricting US market access in EU. Unfortunately, refined high quality software requires considerable resources and no one will invest those considerable resources when the US companies can just offer better software at lower price thanks to their lead and deep pockets until the EU companies go out of business. Sure, EU doesn't need to discover everything again but they will need to pay top talent world class money for years until their products become refined.

replies(6): >>45775578 #>>45775612 #>>45775688 #>>45775870 #>>45776043 #>>45779632 #
embedding-shape ◴[] No.45775870[source]
> I don't believe that EU will have comparable quality "tech" without restricting US market access in EU.

> Sure, EU doesn't need to discover everything again but they will need to pay top talent world class money for years until their products become refined.

Just like the US didn't need to rediscover the inventions of cars, submarines, the web, the printed press and more to be able to build better iterations on those, wouldn't the exact same apply the other way?

It feels like whatever you're saying today could be said the other way in the past, so why does it really matter?

The fact on the ground is that people don't trust the US overall as much, even less the leadership of the US, so whatever dependency has been built up over the years, has to be fixed, no matter if the "local" technology is shittier at the moment.

I'm sure Americans felt the same about printing presses back in the day, where some things you just have to be able to do without needing the permission of others far away.

replies(2): >>45776061 #>>45777556 #
1. mrtksn ◴[] No.45776061[source]
When you do something in a mature industry, you skip quite a lot of losing bets that those involved in maturing it couldn't.

That's why Google, Samsung and others were able to create smartphones comparable to iPhone without having a Steve Jobs and a Johny Ive right after Apple made one.

Once you know the way forward, the rest is an engineering task and it's matter of working towards it. Very low risk compared to the initial work done by the pioneers.

replies(2): >>45776125 #>>45779619 #
2. IndySun ◴[] No.45776125[source]
Apple did exactly what you're accusing others of, re 'smart phones', skipping lost bets and combining existing technologies, that did exist in smartphone form pre iphone.

Lots of real time material evidence exists.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/z62gjfr

replies(1): >>45776262 #
3. mrtksn ◴[] No.45776262[source]
Sure, that's called progress. Apple skipped Motorola, Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung Skipped Motorola, Nokia, Ericsson and Apple. The next entrants skip Motorola, Nokia, Ericsson, Apple, Samsung.

You get the point. When you are getting into an established industry see what works, skip investing billions in directions that go nowhere.

replies(1): >>45776818 #
4. defrost ◴[] No.45776818{3}[source]
This sounds like good advice for EU tech companies stepping up to deliver to customers that want to avoid dependance upon existing US companies (and their associated demonstrably capricious government).
5. thefz ◴[] No.45779619[source]
The first iPhone is very well known to be a rip-off of Palm's Pre. And Jobs did not invent anything himself, he was limited to saying yes/no to the engineers who did.