cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/859623
Since 2020, Next Generation Internet (NGI) programmes, part of European Commission’s Horizon programme, fund free software in Europe using a cascade funding mechanism. This year, according to the Horizon Europe working draft detailing funding programmes for 2025, we notice that Next Generation Internet is not mentioned any more as part of Cluster 4.
[…]
While the USA, China or Russia deploy huge public and private resources to develop software and infrastructure that massively capture private consumer data, the EU can’t afford this renunciation. Free and open source software, as supported by NGI since 2020, is by design the opposite of potential vectors for foreign interference. It lets us keep our data local and favors a community-wide economy and know-how, while allowing an international collaboration. This is all the more essential in the current geopolitical context: the challenge of technological sovereignty is central, and free software allows addressing it while acting for peace and sovereignty in the digital world as a whole.
Just some days I would wish that EU wouldn’t have to work alone in making the world a better place.
Seems like everyone, especially Russia and US right now, are trying to do the exact opposite.
It doesn’t work to make anything a better place. It just acts defensively where its opponents have advantage and offensively where they have disadvantage.
Let’s please remember that the EU is bigger in population and potential than either of these two, but weaker in assets. It’s interested in stalling them in key areas, not actively engaging.
Returning to better places, the EU is working with pretty disgusting regimes.
What are the offensive actions EU is taking on the global stage?
I don’t think we talk about the same thing then.
GDPR, Digital Market Act, the USB C law for e-waste and regulations like those are the one I’m talking about.
And then also what this article is about.
It’s the same thing. Which I’m calling “acting defensively”.
I don’t think I get what you mean, when I only named consumer rights against companies and eco friendly laws?
Can you specify why it’s bad and who the EU is trying to hurt with this?
Work on your reading comprehension if you intend to pretend to act in good faith like this
They don’t protect my privacy because they have a disadvantage though. That’s not at all what the GDPR is all about. Same for the other laws.
GDPR etc. are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to EU regulations. Plenty of them apply to stuff where the EU is world-leading, also very far-reaching ones. Compared to REACH, GDPR is quite low-impact indeed.
That’s not the relation I meant. Rather having a long-term strategy because, compared to Russia and USA and anyone around, time works for the EU.
If you can’t see how that’s a (small) puzzle piece of a long-term strategy then I can’t help you either.
This comment doesn’t seem to make sense both combined with mine and with your previous one, but OK!
I don’t think I see less than many people here.