Utopia Talk / Politics / Euro telcoms drive traffic to Starlink

murder Member	Fri Mar 10 10:33:23 Without us ‘there is no Google’: EU telcos ramp up pressure on Big Tech to pay for the internet > Telecom groups are ramping up pressure on EU regulators to consider a framework where the companies that send traffic over their networks are charged fees to fund infrastructure upgrades. > “Without the telcos, without the network, there is no Netflix, there is no Google,” Michael Trabbia, chief technology and security officer of Orange, told CNBC. > Efforts to implement network fees have been met with disapproval from tech giants such as Netflix, who view the suggestion of direct compensation to telcos as an internet traffic “tax.” http://www...rge-big-tech-for-internet.html
murder Member	Fri Mar 10 10:34:57 What exactly do they charge customers for??? :o)
Sam Adams Member	Fri Mar 10 10:48:40 Just euros being pissed that all the tech money goes to the US. Shouldnt have been so anti-business if you wanted a netflix or facebook, euroweenies.
Seb Member	Fri Mar 10 11:15:16 Nah, other way around - you can't access the consumers unless you pay the infra. No reason why they get to capture all the consumer surplus. Murder: As if the tech firms aren't charging both sides.
murder Member	Fri Mar 10 14:53:30 Whatever. They are just going to end up trying to keep Elon Musk from connecting Europeans to the rest of the world by satellite.
habebe Member	Sat Mar 11 03:01:44 Satelite systems have pros and cons. Yes, it can be mobile, but a branch or rain will cut service.
Seb Member	Sat Mar 11 07:01:19 Murder: I doubt that. The goal of US tech firms is to sell advertising, cutting themselves off from one of the largest consumer markets in the world isn't going to help. Europeans are not going to fork out the ridiculous fees for broadband that musk charges just to use Facebook. And the last thing US firms - who have grown largely by buying out the competition - is to create conditions for Europe to create it's own Amazon, Google etc. by removing or disadvantaging their products.
murder Member	Sat Mar 11 07:46:39 "And the last thing US firms - who have grown largely by buying out the competition - is to create conditions for Europe to create it's own Amazon, Google etc. by removing or disadvantaging their products." Those conditions have always existed. Europe just seems unable to produce that kind of company. What are the largest European alternatives to the large social media companies, and to Google, and to Amazon? Off the top of my head I can't even think of any.
jergul large member	Sat Mar 11 11:57:07 Odd title btw. Starlink also sends its traffic over the ground networks
Seb Member	Sat Mar 11 12:23:02 Murder: "Those conditions have always existed." Nope. Every time a European company gets an innovation that's likely to scale, Google, MSFT, Amazon or Facebook acquire it. As they do potential US competitors. If they were to voluntarily exit the EU market, they would not be able to easily do this. I do love how you Americans think there's something special and magically innovative about you rather than having deep pockets and lax regulators.
murder Member	Sat Mar 11 16:53:35 "I do love how you Americans think there's something special and magically innovative about you rather than having deep pockets and lax regulators." We don't. We think that Europe crushes innovation.
Seb Member	Sat Mar 11 17:34:36 Murder: Yeah, but that's also bollocks. Your big tech firms grow through acquisition, not innovation, and they are constantly buying up European firms.
jergul large member	Sat Mar 11 18:05:28 Seb That is one of the costs of a global economy bolstering the USD. Acquisitions come cheap.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Mar 11 18:53:02 "US firms - who have grown largely by buying out the competition" Rofl. What a sad pathetic excuse.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Mar 11 18:54:23 "You only won because you were first". Rofl seb.
murder Member	Sat Mar 11 19:04:51 "Your big tech firms grow through acquisition, not innovation, and they are constantly buying up European firms." It's not like they are forced to sell.
Habebe Member	Sun Mar 12 01:06:50 Seb, I actually agree that residential use for Starlink in Europe seems very limited, even in rural areas, mobile style data s easier and cheaper. "And the last thing US firms - who have grown largely by buying out the competition - is to create conditions for Europe to create it's own Amazon, Google etc. by removing or disadvantaging their products." It's cute that you think Europe has the ability to be competitive in such areas. Murder is 100% right (that feels strange to type) its not that we see the US as magical and more that Europe crushes innovation. Innovation is more than just technical knowledge, Europe has great minds, but they prefer regulation to innovation and it makes them less competitive. It's a mixed bag, and a wide paintbrush, Europe offers plenty to be envious of, but economically competitive at scale, they are not. Outside of trucks, I still only prefer to drive Swedish cars, they are just built better and I have an admiration for their focus on safety and comfort. A similar story can be told about the Euro techniques on space commercialization. Europe had plans to build a rocket system to haul shit, BUT, before they even finished building it SpaceX was offering per Kilo cheaper prices than it would cost the Euro ship. Its a mix of general attitudes and policy. Europe doesn't invest in it's own tech firms, companies over $50 million get their funding largely from US VC's. Even Euro tech that is not acquired often jumps ship to move HQ to the US who intentionally supports bringing foriegn talent and companies from around the world with policies and culture/attitudes.
Seb Member	Sun Mar 12 05:45:38 Murder: And? It's perfectly reasonable for the EU politically to decide having big US firms buy out the most important companies is bad for the EU economy and society. Not least the tax implications. The US has loads of rules preventing foreign acquisition of certain sectors. The problem is not that the EU is bureaucratic hidebound wasteland of no innovation. It is that the EU practices free markets, and the US used bureaucratic regulation to protect and support its monopolies. EU taking steps to limit tax base erosion and protect domestic industries from acquisition are entirely justified morally and economically.
Seb Member	Sun Mar 12 05:47:24 Habebe: That's utter bollocks You've just internalised the idea that the hallmark of innovation is giant monopolistic companies. "You cannot be innovating, because look, where are your giant monopolies?"
Seb Member	Sun Mar 12 05:47:56 Its pathetic that the biggest defenders of US consumer rights is the European Commission.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Mar 12 12:47:54 If the euros could innovate, why are us tech companies always first?
Habebe Member	Sun Mar 12 12:55:06 Seb, I didn't even say that. But Europe does not fund large tech companies, US VC does. European unicorns flee to the US. "is that the EU practices free markets, and the US used bureaucratic regulation to protect and support its monopolies." Like how they raised a fit over that the US favored our own Evo's, but ignored that they have the most protective regulations in the world, far more slanted and STILL a are less competitive.
Seb Member	Sun Mar 12 14:59:58 Sam: They aren't. US companies are often the first to achieve scale though. And then acquire them. Habebe: "But Europe does not fund large tech companies," The VC model is often based on an exit sale to a tech giant. "the most protective regulations in the world" Nonsense - US automobile standards are deliberately designed to be different from those Japan and Europe converged on precisely to act as a barrier to imports. Its been that way forever.
Seb Member	Sun Mar 12 15:04:45 I mean it is true that the US VC market is a great dreal of the reason why written tech companies end up going for acquisition rather than scaling. But that's also because the FAANGs can can will rip off their product, exploit their market position to squeeze them out etc. Cf. How Alexa and echo products will make it extremely inconvenient to get Spotify as the default app and will relentlessly push Amazon music. But neither of those effects are the same as "Europeans don't innovate". They innovate a lot. That's why the US firms keep buying them. And why Europe absolutely should look to try and capture far more of the consumer surplus domestically.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Mar 12 22:46:40 "US companies are often the first to achieve scale though." Why is this? Clearly the US is doing something better than europe when it comes to tech companies.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Mar 12 23:01:54 Lets be honest. The last time europe did something that was both innovative and large scale was the concorde. 50 years ago. Since then, nothing.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Mar 12 23:04:31 And that was an economic failure, despite being badass.
Seb Member	Mon Mar 13 04:15:16 Sam: Single language, a single regulatory environment, more integrated capital markets, nobody enforcing competition rules. The technology that underpins LLMs was developed by deep mind. Deep mind for the whole alpha protein thing. It was subsequently acquired by Google.
Seb Member	Mon Mar 13 04:15:30 Reverse the order of those last sentences.
Sam Adams Member	Mon Mar 13 12:18:43 Lower taxes and less bureaucracy has nothing to do with it eh seb?
Seb Member	Mon Mar 13 12:34:48 Sam: Different bureaucracy. The main issue is you have one, the EU has 27. At least when it comes to services. Many of those 27 are actually more streamlined than the US. The big difference though is anti-competition law. You have it, but don't enforce it.
Seb Member	Mon Mar 13 12:35:38 As for taxes, you remember all that stuff about reverse takeovers and double Dutch Irish sandwich?
Sam Adams Member	Mon Mar 13 21:20:40 'The big difference though is anti-competition law. You have it, but don't enforce it." US having fewer laws getting in the way is why europe cant compete is what you are saying? Funny, thats what i have been telling you all along. Glad you finally got it.
Sam Adams Member	Mon Mar 13 21:24:03 "As for taxes, you remember all that stuff about reverse takeovers and double Dutch Irish sandwich?" Companies tend to migrate to places with lower taxes? Holy shit! You learned 2 things in a day. You begin to understand. Good job, my young padawan. My work here is done.
Habebe Member	Tue Mar 14 03:26:31 Seb, Yes, Europeans can innovate, and the ones that do usually flee to the US, that's basically my point. The UK is pulling a hefty sum of that tech as well vs the EU, probably one of the better things to come out of Brexit. As for Autos, thr EU taxes US cars at 4x the rate.Remember at Davos when the Euros were whining over the inflation reduction act, nd they STILL have higher rates. "Different bureaucracy. The main issue is you have one, the EU has 27." We have 51, something you never have truly understood.
Seb Member	Tue Mar 14 04:04:10 Sam: "US having fewer laws getting in the way is why europe cant compete" You have the laws, you don't enforce them. That's called corruption. Monopolies are not innovation, not competition. "Companies tend to migrate to places with lower taxes" I see. So obviously Europe outcompetes the US as all Apple and other companies move their IP to Ireland and rent it back to the US market. Problem solved. Ireland is the most innovative country, and the US can't compete.
Seb Member	Tue Mar 14 04:07:07 Habebe: "and the ones that do usually flee to the US," No. They usually sell their ideas to touch American monopolists. "The UK is pulling a hefty sum of that tech as well vs the EU, probably one of the better things to come out of Brexit." Incorrect, brexit has been terrible for the UK tech scene, resulting in the collapse of their valuations and further purchases by American firms as they lack market access to scale domestically or in Europe. "We have 51, something you never have truly understood" The difference between US states is far far smaller than the difference between EU states - something you have never understood.
Sam Adams Member	Tue Mar 14 09:43:58 "You have the laws, you don't enforce them." The US should add more bureaucratic waste to match our bureaucratic waste. Lol.
Seb Member	Tue Mar 14 10:51:14 Sam: "Yay monopolies are efficient" is a really odd claim to hear someone make, but if that's the case Sam it seems more pointless to have laws but not enforce them than to repeal the laws. At least European regulation serves an actual purpose!
Sam Adams Member	Tue Mar 14 11:05:11 "monopolies" Rofl. More weak excuses. None of US companies that dominate your markets are monopolies. "At least European regulation serves an actual purpose!" Indeed. The purpose is to drive tech workers and profits to the US. please continue.
Habebe Member	Tue Mar 14 15:50:28 "No. They usually sell their ideas to touch American monopolists" Some do, the others move their company out of the EU. "Incorrect, brexit has been terrible for the UK tech scene," Not relative to the EU, the UK leads the EU in maintaining tech. The EU has great talent, in creating startup ideas, Im not denying that. However, the regulatory set up for them to scale is atrocious. Once tech companies start to scale, the Euros find them uninvestable. Look into the lack of funding for European tech companies. 3rd round funding is relatively non existent there, it is available in the US which leads to the "brain drain". Drawing in talent from across the world with sensible policies is a great thing. Even the tech that stays in Europe, is often funded by US VC, Europeans just seem overly adverse to risk.
Seb Member	Tue Mar 14 18:02:52 Sam: "None of US companies that dominate your markets are monopolies." LOL. " The purpose is to drive tech workers and profits to the US." I would favour instead an approach that simply stops profits being offshored via tax reforms and interventions to prevent platforms engaging in the equivalent of front-running their customers, bundling, insider trading etc. If they want to pull their services, great - that creates a local market for rivals to build services with business models that provide a more equitable distribution of consumer surplus across the supply chain. Habebe: "Not relative to the EU, the UK leads the EU in maintaining tech." "Look into the lack of funding for European tech companies. 3rd round funding is relatively non existent there, it is available in the US which leads to the "brain drain"." Yeah, that is about joined up capital markets though. Also, it is about the whole SV/VC model - which takes it as read that the way you deliver innovation and new services to the market is to get there first, achieve scale quickly and drive out all competition, build a massive moat and then acquire the competition to maintain scale. Google and Amazon and Facebook haven't developed a successful innovation in years - every single one of them have been acquisitions of potential competitors - with the effect of sustaining higher prices. This - perhaps - is actually not a good business model for society any more than if for example, we defined the successful business model for any other industry. We would call it monopolistic. The problem I think is less that European firms fail to achieve scale, and that Eurpoean banks are less willing to bet the farm on funding a firm trying to scale to monopoly, but that US regulators are asleep at the wheel and have allowed the tech sector to be dominated by four or five entrenched monopolies that abuse their market position to capture ever more of the value chain in ever broader parts of the economy. That's bad for the economy, bad for the tax base, and bad for the consumer. The fact that this is offset because it's pulling in wealth from outside the US to the US isn't a great thing - it is actually likely to blow apart global free trade at some point because, bluntly - why should the rest of the world let the US be a haven for monopolies? "Even the tech that stays in Europe, is often funded by US VC, Europeans just seem overly adverse to risk." I mean we've literally just seen a bank at the heart of the VC model blow up - and we are still living in the fall out from the last financial crisis brewed up on wall street due to excessive risk appetites. Do you think they might have a point there?
Sam Adams Member	Wed Mar 15 11:13:46 Name a monopoly.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: