8 ms·

Sure, theoretically, if it could come to an agreement, and meanwhile the cross-border cooperation of even the inter-EU countries is at an abysmal rate, and curr

Sure, theoretically, if it could come to an agreement, and meanwhile the cross-border cooperation of even the inter-EU countries is at an abysmal rate, and currently, even during a goddamn land war with Russia, Germany and France can't come to an agreement to build a fighter jet ensemble (together).

qsort 4mo ago
This is unfortunately the problem. The level of the public debate is abysmal, most politicians push unbelivably stupid shit about immigration and other identitarian nonsense, budget gets spent to ensure cheese and wine have the proper AOC certifications on them. Honestly up to a point I even understand it, many people don't see themselves as having a meaningful identity as EU citizens and you can't force it upon them. Asking for sensible AI policy is like asking for a base on mars.
- davidguetta 4mo ago
  reducing unskilled and hateful immigration is the democratic thing do this has nothing to the other good idea which is to start building AI
  - qsort 4mo ago
    Actually yea, it has everything to do with it. I am open to the idea that we should handle immigration differently, but I want a plan and specifics, not slogans. What we want to achieve, and by what mechanisms you plan to get there. Open any newspaper: are you more likely to find careful and considerate opinions or racist screeds? And that is the problem. Time and energy and money and political capital are routinely spent on inconsequential electoral poliTICS rather than substantial poliCY.
    - davidguetta 4mo ago
      you only need to handle immigration if you have immigration. problem is kinda solved if you don't have immigration or at least "immigration that cause problems" i know many immigrant who don't pose any problem withou need for "handling" or "supervision"
  - ben_w 4mo ago
    > reducing unskilled and hateful immigration is the democratic thing do Hateful, sure, though just like all those on the right who say the first word of "hate crime" is redundant, I'd argue home-grown hate's just as dangerous as imported. But "unskilled" immigration? When the topic is AI? If this stuff works as advertised, *nobody's skills matter any more*. If it doesn't at least render many of our skills obsolete, why build it? If you make an AI which can't automate anything, how is this not a waste of money? Even without that, I've not seen anyone who knows about Baumol's cost disease opine either way about migration, high or low skilled.
- mr_toad 4mo ago
  > many people don't see themselves as having a meaningful identity as EU citizens I sometimes wonder if the citizens of the United States (of America) even comprehend that the EU is not itself a sovereign nation (unlike the states in say, the USA, or Australia) and is just a union of sovereign polities. Nobody in the EU is an EU Citizen unless they are a citizen of one of the member states.
pelorat 4mo ago
The fighter jet program was a jobs program, not dissimilar to how many US government programs are jobs programs by having different parts of it made in different states for no goo reason. Add in some nationalism and it was inevitable it would not work out.
- fragmede 4mo ago
  If it's inevitable, then how come the F35's flying around? Sure there's some complaints to be made, but I've seen it work in person.
- kube-system 4mo ago
  I always find it strange that being a "jobs program" is said as if derogatory, especially when talking about military equipment of all things. The free market optimizes for handling normalcy, not exception handling, like wartime. The reason to artificially these jobs is so that you have the factories and expertise to make these things when you need them.
- ExoticPearTree 4mo ago
  And what, they couldn't split the jobs 50/50 in any meaningful way so that everyone was happy? Dunno, you can let the french design and the germans build or something.
  - pfdietz 4mo ago
    That's how you get something like Ariane 6 -- engineered to satisfy political constraints rather that to be competitive. Granted, NASA or to some extent the US military have the same problem.
    - ExoticPearTree 4mo ago
      NASA is stubborn to keep going with Boeing. I'm actually fascinated that no one was put behind bars so far for the blunder the new rocket system is. The US military has a few companies that it can work with to produce what it needs, so they are not necessarily tied to "we need to build a plane in 20 different locations to satisfy everyone". And yeah, Europe has an expensive rocket no one wants to use commercially because it many times more expensive than the competition.
morkalork 4mo ago
In a weird sense, the EU exemplifies what the USA would be like without a strong federal government: Dysfunctional as states compete with, undercut and stifle each other.
- oliver236 4mo ago
  isnt the eu basically a less federalist version of the usa? how is it then that the usa claims its more free? the individual state members in the EU have more freedom than individual states. someone explain this to me please
  - smashini 4mo ago
    Id say the EU is less federal because each member country maintains its own sovereignty and local laws. Its more of a coalition of the willing. While in the US the federal gov can override states. The EU also has each state vote on different legislations. (Massive oversimplification)
  - chermi 4mo ago
    Because the laws are different? Are you really confused?
  - LastTrain 4mo ago
    The US lays claim to all kinds of bullshit. But more to the point; different values, different laws - does it matter how centralized the control is? I would argue neither is “more” free, just free in different ways. US has a huge problem in equal access to the law, which undermines freedom no matter how good the laws are.
  - jandrewrogers 4mo ago
    In the US, the freedom is explicitly for the people, not Federal nor State government. States are relatively more free than the Federal government, but both are greatly restricted by the Constitution. Before the Constitution, the US had a previous government under the Articles of Confederation (see below) that had many deficiencies and only gave freedom to member States. The EU is organized more similar to the US under the Articles of Confederation. The first American government (Articles of Confederation) gave State governments almost unlimited power e.g. they could print their own money. It did not grant freedom to the people in any meaningful way. States were free to abuse this power both against their own citizens and, more importantly, the other member States. This created many practical problems. The second and current American government (Constitution) learned lessons from this experience. It removed a limited set of key powers from the States and gave it to the Federal government such as the creation of currency. It also forced all States to interact with each other on the same terms, with strict oversight from the Federal government. Additionally, it explicitly granted rights to the people rather than their State governments, since the States had demonstrated they could not be trusted to do the right thing. These changes forced the States to play nicely with each other and treat their people better. These changes were a large improvement. Almost every law an American experiences is State law, because States have much more freedom to create laws. The Federal government can only make laws from a short list. Both State and Federal governments are strictly prohibited from creating many kinds of laws. In the US, freedom is for the people, not for the member States. The Federal government has even less freedom than the member States to make law.
piltdownman 4mo ago
You mean like they've been doing since the 1950s with the the largest physics laboratory in the world (CERN)? Or more to the point, the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC JU) of which 27/27 EU member states participate? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_High-Performance_Computing_Joint_Undertaking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_High-Performance_Comp... Even at the smaller level the ethos and ambition is clear - take EURO-3C: the Horizon Europe project aimed at delivering a pan-European sovereign infrastructure that integrates Telco, Edge, Cloud, and AI capabilities under a federated model which has 70+ Euro-participants. https://www.medialaws.eu/the-euro-3c-initiative-a-new-dawn-for-europes-digital-sovereignty-ambitions/ https://www.medialaws.eu/the-euro-3c-initiative-a-new-dawn-f...
- smashini 4mo ago
  Compute 2027 coming soon ;)
- graemep 4mo ago
  CERN is not an EU project, predates the EU, and is not located in the EU. EuroHPC JU includes a number of non-EU members. I think that is the way forward: work with whoever has common interests and is willing to work together. I think the point is that the EU does not necessarily make cooperation between governments any easier.
  - mnewme 4mo ago
    It is partly located in the EU and primarily funded by European countries

qsort 4mo ago

This is unfortunately the problem. The level of the public debate is abysmal, most politicians push unbelivably stupid shit about immigration and other identitarian nonsense, budget gets spent to ensure cheese and wine have the proper AOC certifications on them. Honestly up to a point I even understand it, many people don't see themselves as having a meaningful identity as EU citizens and you can't force it upon them. Asking for sensible AI policy is like asking for a base on mars.

davidguetta 4mo ago
reducing unskilled and hateful immigration is the democratic thing do this has nothing to the other good idea which is to start building AI
- qsort 4mo ago
  Actually yea, it has everything to do with it. I am open to the idea that we should handle immigration differently, but I want a plan and specifics, not slogans. What we want to achieve, and by what mechanisms you plan to get there. Open any newspaper: are you more likely to find careful and considerate opinions or racist screeds? And that is the problem. Time and energy and money and political capital are routinely spent on inconsequential electoral poliTICS rather than substantial poliCY.
  - davidguetta 4mo ago
    you only need to handle immigration if you have immigration. problem is kinda solved if you don't have immigration or at least "immigration that cause problems" i know many immigrant who don't pose any problem withou need for "handling" or "supervision"
- ben_w 4mo ago
  > reducing unskilled and hateful immigration is the democratic thing do Hateful, sure, though just like all those on the right who say the first word of "hate crime" is redundant, I'd argue home-grown hate's just as dangerous as imported. But "unskilled" immigration? When the topic is AI? If this stuff works as advertised, *nobody's skills matter any more*. If it doesn't at least render many of our skills obsolete, why build it? If you make an AI which can't automate anything, how is this not a waste of money? Even without that, I've not seen anyone who knows about Baumol's cost disease opine either way about migration, high or low skilled.
mr_toad 4mo ago
> many people don't see themselves as having a meaningful identity as EU citizens I sometimes wonder if the citizens of the United States (of America) even comprehend that the EU is not itself a sovereign nation (unlike the states in say, the USA, or Australia) and is just a union of sovereign polities. Nobody in the EU is an EU Citizen unless they are a citizen of one of the member states.

pelorat 4mo ago

The fighter jet program was a jobs program, not dissimilar to how many US government programs are jobs programs by having different parts of it made in different states for no goo reason. Add in some nationalism and it was inevitable it would not work out.

fragmede 4mo ago
If it's inevitable, then how come the F35's flying around? Sure there's some complaints to be made, but I've seen it work in person.
kube-system 4mo ago
I always find it strange that being a "jobs program" is said as if derogatory, especially when talking about military equipment of all things. The free market optimizes for handling normalcy, not exception handling, like wartime. The reason to artificially these jobs is so that you have the factories and expertise to make these things when you need them.
ExoticPearTree 4mo ago
And what, they couldn't split the jobs 50/50 in any meaningful way so that everyone was happy? Dunno, you can let the french design and the germans build or something.
- pfdietz 4mo ago
  That's how you get something like Ariane 6 -- engineered to satisfy political constraints rather that to be competitive. Granted, NASA or to some extent the US military have the same problem.
  - ExoticPearTree 4mo ago
    NASA is stubborn to keep going with Boeing. I'm actually fascinated that no one was put behind bars so far for the blunder the new rocket system is. The US military has a few companies that it can work with to produce what it needs, so they are not necessarily tied to "we need to build a plane in 20 different locations to satisfy everyone". And yeah, Europe has an expensive rocket no one wants to use commercially because it many times more expensive than the competition.

morkalork 4mo ago

In a weird sense, the EU exemplifies what the USA would be like without a strong federal government: Dysfunctional as states compete with, undercut and stifle each other.

oliver236 4mo ago
isnt the eu basically a less federalist version of the usa? how is it then that the usa claims its more free? the individual state members in the EU have more freedom than individual states. someone explain this to me please
- smashini 4mo ago
  Id say the EU is less federal because each member country maintains its own sovereignty and local laws. Its more of a coalition of the willing. While in the US the federal gov can override states. The EU also has each state vote on different legislations. (Massive oversimplification)
- chermi 4mo ago
  Because the laws are different? Are you really confused?
- LastTrain 4mo ago
  The US lays claim to all kinds of bullshit. But more to the point; different values, different laws - does it matter how centralized the control is? I would argue neither is “more” free, just free in different ways. US has a huge problem in equal access to the law, which undermines freedom no matter how good the laws are.
- jandrewrogers 4mo ago
  In the US, the freedom is explicitly for the people, not Federal nor State government. States are relatively more free than the Federal government, but both are greatly restricted by the Constitution. Before the Constitution, the US had a previous government under the Articles of Confederation (see below) that had many deficiencies and only gave freedom to member States. The EU is organized more similar to the US under the Articles of Confederation. The first American government (Articles of Confederation) gave State governments almost unlimited power e.g. they could print their own money. It did not grant freedom to the people in any meaningful way. States were free to abuse this power both against their own citizens and, more importantly, the other member States. This created many practical problems. The second and current American government (Constitution) learned lessons from this experience. It removed a limited set of key powers from the States and gave it to the Federal government such as the creation of currency. It also forced all States to interact with each other on the same terms, with strict oversight from the Federal government. Additionally, it explicitly granted rights to the people rather than their State governments, since the States had demonstrated they could not be trusted to do the right thing. These changes forced the States to play nicely with each other and treat their people better. These changes were a large improvement. Almost every law an American experiences is State law, because States have much more freedom to create laws. The Federal government can only make laws from a short list. Both State and Federal governments are strictly prohibited from creating many kinds of laws. In the US, freedom is for the people, not for the member States. The Federal government has even less freedom than the member States to make law.

piltdownman 4mo ago

You mean like they've been doing since the 1950s with the the largest physics laboratory in the world (CERN)? Or more to the point, the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC JU) of which 27/27 EU member states participate? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_High-Performance_Computing_Joint_Undertaking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_High-Performance_Comp... Even at the smaller level the ethos and ambition is clear - take EURO-3C: the Horizon Europe project aimed at delivering a pan-European sovereign infrastructure that integrates Telco, Edge, Cloud, and AI capabilities under a federated model which has 70+ Euro-participants. https://www.medialaws.eu/the-euro-3c-initiative-a-new-dawn-for-europes-digital-sovereignty-ambitions/ https://www.medialaws.eu/the-euro-3c-initiative-a-new-dawn-f...

smashini 4mo ago
Compute 2027 coming soon ;)
graemep 4mo ago
CERN is not an EU project, predates the EU, and is not located in the EU. EuroHPC JU includes a number of non-EU members. I think that is the way forward: work with whoever has common interests and is willing to work together. I think the point is that the EU does not necessarily make cooperation between governments any easier.
- mnewme 4mo ago
  It is partly located in the EU and primarily funded by European countries