4 ms·
The retaliation against individual government members is a new thing. This got started against Russia, where various individuals were sanctioned for financial c
by pjc50 10mo ago
The retaliation against individual government members is a new thing. This got started against Russia, where various individuals were sanctioned for financial crimes and then more recently over the war in Ukraine. But it's not something that historically one government has done to another in the past, pressure individual lawmakers over their votes.
It is however a massive alarm that the UK cannot afford to use US cloud services for anything governmental, and especially should not be signing any contracts with Palantir. Perhaps revoking the Palantir one should be used as leverage here? Or do we just admit to being a sort of damp version of Puerto Rico, not a state but subject to US governance?
Then there's the F35s, the ""independent"" (not) nuclear deterrent, and so on.
- arethuza 10mo ago""independent"" (not) nuclear deterrent" We really are in a weird state of dependency with the US regarding deterrence - missiles sourced from US stocks, UK nuclear material built into warheads using a US design. I wonder if there is a block in the missiles to stop them being used against the US? Edit: I don't think there is any dependency on the US once a UK Trident sub is at sea - for the simple reason there no external dependencies (no codes or anything) - the crews have all they need to launch.
- ben_w 10mo ago> I wonder if there is a block in the missiles to stop them being used against the US? When test firing gets into the news, it's because it has the opposite problem and goes towards the US.
- rich_sasha 10mo agoI have wondered about this. Would we know there aren't any radio receivers that might pick up a signal from satellites saying, nuh-uh, not this way?
- GJim 10mo ago> The retaliation against individual government members is a new thing It's Donald Trumps SOP.
- miohtama 10mo agoAlso what has changed is that European countries came up with extraterritorial laws and started to fine the US companies and want to have saying how they run their business. GDPR was the first step, and was still reasonable, but now there are several censorship laws. Most notable UK and Italy, where the latter wants to nuke anything they say from global DNS in 15 minutes without due process.
- GJim 10mo ago> and started to fine the US companies and want to have saying how they run their business IN EUROPE. Fixed that for you.
- piva00 10mo agoExtraterritorial? Those companies are doing business in the EU, it's exactly the same in any country on Earth: if you want to do business in their territory there are local laws to follow. Have you thought about this for even a second?
- miohtama 10mo agoWhat happens is that European companies buy services that are produced in the US, not in Europe. The European countries are free to ban and fine companies buying those services like Russia does. Italy, for example, can start by fining companies using Cloudflare, IP blocking Cloudflare and face the political consequences of it. But they don't want politicalconsequences which is the source of the friction. An Italian would be really pissed off for politicians if someone shows up their house and takes away computer because of watching football illegally.
- moi2388 10mo agoSo what? You can also buy meat from outside the EU, but if you want it to be used inside the EU, it has to conform to EU standards. Otherwise you are simply not allowed to sell it in the EU.
- 10mo ago