You'd have a point if Germany did anything to actually support businesses scaling instead of trying to kneecap them at every turn

> I don’t want my songs – some written with survivors of conflict – to enrich people who fund weapons

Says the man whose comfortable existence is entirely predicated on advanced weaponry wielded on his behalf.

Setting aside spotify, this is the philosophy of an child

Just because things have been horrific up to this point, does not mean that we should want them to continue to be horrific.

Advocating for change against the violent factions of the world, is indeed, a good thing to do.

> Just because things have been horrific up to this point, does not mean that we should want them to continue to be horrific

Wrong. Things stopped being horrific precisely because of the overwhelming amount of weaponry produced by capitalist enterprises on behalf of democratic nations. Continuing the process prevents the horrors from returning.

> Advocating for change against the violent factions of the world, is indeed, a good thing to do.

Also wrong. Any "violent faction" that would listen to you is de facto a good faction, so you are either wasting your time or undermining exactly the factions you should be empowering.

That is quite literally the meaning of life, so yes.

Citation needed? :)

I suspect that this is going to fall into the "nothing ever happens" bucket.

What they're implying is that it is illegal for US companies to comply with EU law.

This is significantly different than the EU enforcing the GDPR extraterritorially since that's basically just an increased cost of doing business in Europe and is apparently worth it.

But if the US companies have to choose between complying with US extraterritorial law or EU extraterritorial law they're going to have to choose the US, for obvious reasons.

It doesn't seem to me that convenient legal subsidiary structures or data physicality setups are gonna work here.

The effect of US companies withdrawing cloud services would be devastating to the EU. Imagine if you could no longer access your gmail or outlook account, your apple or google photos disappear , whatsapp shuts down, all you companies documents are no longer accessible on Office365 or G drive.

The results would be indistinguishable from a massive cyber attack and would take decades to recover from.

There's just no way the EU would inflict a wound of this magnitude on itself.

Indeed. The EU will search for a way to keep allowing citizen data on American intelligence agencies, because there simply is no alternative politically affordable. It would take American SWAT teams regularly raiding the streets of Belgium and Paris, in plain daylight, and equivocally arresting French/Belgian cafe owners for having abortions (and thus violating Mississippi state laws), for the EU to do the right thing.

> The results would be indistinguishable from a massive cyber attack and would take decades to recover from.

It would be painful, yes, but it wouldn't "take decades to recover from", not even years. These services, technically, aren't so difficult to recreate, if you have a big enough market.

Very naive. The services are potentially replaceable, the data is not.

That's not even considering the political backlash. How do you explain to your population that their digital lives have been permanently deleted because of a trans-national legal spat they don't care about?

More likely the EU will be forced to back down since they are completely dependent on US digital services imports for basic infrastructure.

FWIW I have 4 sonos devices in my home and I've got basically zero problems. I guess I mostly use Airplay to control them but I do occasionally use the app and it's fine.

I'm really not sure what all the fuss is about.

What are you trying to say, that everyone's wrong?

The pre-war energy status quo was also not good, and further in the context of the zero-sum german budget created by the Schuldenbremse a euro invested in the energiewende is a euro that cannot be more productively invested elsewhere.

> Road deaths are "random". Obviously each one has a specific cause, but we're all equally at risk. We're all in agreement that they should be avoided, and we have significant legislation to improve safety (no one is advocating for drunk driving.

This is not true at all. Auto accidents are not random and we have significant policy levers that we could pull to drastically reduce them but it's politically controversial to do so.

Simple example would regulating the height of the nose of trucks so that F-150 drivers can see pedestrians easier and make impacts less deadly. Obviously policy, politically impossible.

The cause of an accident is not random. There are lots of causes and we have lots if regulations around that.

The victim if an accident is the random I'm referring to. There's no reason an F-150 driver hits one pedestrian over another.

Naturally there are lots more regulations we could add - but that progresses slowly, and with regard to the parties involved (manufacturers, owners, cities etc.)

By contrast anti-abortion legislation has been enacted quickly, without much (if any) consultation with the electorate or medical fraternity. This has resulted in poorly thought out laws in some cases.

It's a tradeoff, for example the German Girocard network is fundamentally built on top of SEPA so it is very low cost.

But that also means that it does not support features that credit card networks support like chargebacks or 3DS. For that reason it also doesn't work online.

This is a space that a lot of bank transfer payment schemes fit into: low cost, fast settlement, high risk.

> That’s right, this manufacturing company will become a unicorn this year—one of only 6,000 companies in the world earning more than $1 billion in revenue.

This is not what "unicorn" means. I do not think this author knows much about what they are writing about.