Technology

67987 readers

3951 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

733

Europe is looking for alternatives to US cloud providers (arstechnica.com)

submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

92 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The global backlash against the second Donald Trump administration keeps on growing. Canadians have boycotted US-made products, anti–Elon Musk posters have appeared across London amid widespread Tesla protests, and European officials have drastically increased military spending as US support for Ukraine falters. Dominant US tech services may be the next focus.

There are early signs that some European companies and governments are souring on their use of American cloud services provided by the three so-called hyperscalers. Between them, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and Amazon Web Services (AWS) host vast swathes of the Internet and keep thousands of businesses running. However, some organizations appear to be reconsidering their use of these companies’ cloud services—including servers, storage, and databases—citing uncertainties around privacy and data access fears under the Trump administration.

“There’s a huge appetite in Europe to de-risk or decouple the over-dependence on US tech companies, because there is a concern that they could be weaponized against European interests,” says Marietje Schaake, a nonresident fellow at Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center and a former decadelong member of the European Parliament.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

P2P has insane latency and is not applicable to most industries. It's a decent idea for back ups though. P2P also has insane energy costs. It's not as bad as BitCoins, but it will destroy our planet for sure.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think that cloud costs are pretty much hidden under the corporate curtain. Things like water usage, energy usage for those 24/7 running servers, amount of servers that are running and not doing anything, finally the environmental impact around those big blocks of servers are pretty much not existent in the media.

Torrent sharing is doing fine.

Also doing same things over and over again because USA have it so Europe must have it to is not the way to go for me. I think Europe need it's own way for technology and have all the bits to do it. I'm not saying that Europe should do the youtube in p2p manner because that's insane but gov administration and countries beurocracy can go p2p.

P2P energy cost will be way less in my opinion. The servers don't need to be online 24/7 if you think about it, for office workers they just need them when they are working. For people you can just request old data on demand and spin up server once per week to send bunch of encrypted emails. We're used to that internet is instant but gov shouldn't be instant it should be slow and stable so you don't get punished, that's completly oposite from what mainstream media internet is.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Cloud costs are super low. That's why clouds are so cheap - every penny is optimised, because it eats into profits. P2P is extremely expensive and resource intensive.

Torrents are not doing fine, torrents are a really good example of huge resource waste, latency and stability issues. And, contrary to your opinion, it's better to make YouTube P2P than gov services. Because YouTube is not sensitive to latency and doesn't require stability or security.

Your idea that gov services should not be instant is just bonkers.

In any case, P2P is useless, insecure, slow and power hungry. And, once again, it shouldn't be used for anything but back ups.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think we can end discussion here because what you wrote is completly not true.

Do you even know what P2P stands for ? Do you know that you use P2P every day and all the time, for example by using HTTP2/QUIC.
You need 0 resources to run P2P network.

Cloud computing costs are way higher than colocating server anywhere. Many companies are moving out from cloud after facing high costs. The only place cloud is shining is when you want to spin up many resources for a short period of time. And that is because we don't have kind of computing power provider on the market where you could spin up many resources from many local computers.

Do you even know why cloud took of 20 years ago ? Have you been using internet 20 years ago ? Compare connection speed of local houshold from 20 years ago with speed right now. Compare mobile internet plan and think how it changed.

You have no idea what you are writing about.