
Macron Push to Drop CIA Code Quickens as Trump Calls EU Foe - DyslexicAtheist
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-06/macron-push-to-drop-cia-code-turns-serious-as-trump-calls-eu-foe
======
pjc50
Intelligence and counterintelligence among the allies of NATO is a complex
business. It can't be stopped entirely and it's too lucrative to renounce, but
at the same time there have to be invisible barriers of "norms" that prevent
it getting out of hand. Especially now there's a president who wouldn't
recognize a norm if he fell over it in the street.

France spy on Boeing and pass it to Airbus, while the NSA do the same for
Boeing, but would France tolerate CIA interference in its elections?
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-
europe-32542140](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32542140)

~~~
freeflight
This has not much to do with NATO, but much more with Five Eyes [0]. You
either with 'em or you are one of their targets.

Out of curiosity: Do you have any evidence for France spying on Boing and
passing it on to Airbus? I mean, where's France's equivalent of ECHELON? [1]

Especially in the context of US dominance of the social media sphere, it's
hard to imagine any other country having similar access and capabilities to
the US's.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes)

[1]
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/820758.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/820758.stm)

~~~
oomem
Supposedly Frenchelon:

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenchelon](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenchelon)
[https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenchelon](https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenchelon)

------
raesene9
I've been somewhat surprised for a long time that the EU hasn't done more to
foster local tech companies and seemed content to rely on foreign suppliers.

Dependence on other countries will always leave a risk that they can leverage
that against you, either by allowing for spying or backdoors, or by
threatening to withold supply.

Obviously for smaller countries it wouldn't be practical to use homegrown
technology, but the EU should have sufficiently deep pockets to do so, at
least in strategically sensitive areas.

~~~
fetbaffe
Problem with the EU/Europe it is still the old companies from more than 100
years ago that is dominating the economy and they influence the legislative
process, education systems & job markets etc.

This is at least true for Sweden. Take a look on the OMX Stockholm 30 index,
consists of the 30 most-traded stock on the Stockholm stock exchange.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMX_Stockholm_30](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMX_Stockholm_30)

If you trace the origins of these companies the youngest was created in the
80-thies for Comviq that later became Tele2 (created in 1997)

Basically all of the others are from the 50-ies or before, many founded in
19th century.

~~~
tajen
Problem in Europe is that there’s always a chase against rich people, too. One
could not build Apple in France, they would get mugged – at best you get laws
against the concentration of money.

Meanwhile you get benefits if your startup is in one of the approved sectors
and employing doctorates. You don’t get money if you are just reusing proven
tech like Apple does; You have to do research. That means we fund research a
lot, while we tax implementation. I guess it’s mostly great for competing
countries.

And thus, the economy is mostly guided in Europe, as opposed to innovative.

~~~
fetbaffe
Yes, and I think we can sum it up with Europe = old money, US = new money.

It is hard to become rich in Europe, families that are rich became rich a long
time ago.

------
simonh
Any non-US government using Palantir software or services is basically handing
over their intelligence infrastructure to the US, now a declared foe of the EU
for a start. Nice job Peter Thiel.

------
seren
This is also a natural consequence of globalization, and the increasing
complexity of digital layers. At one point, it becomes impossible to have a
100% home grown solution, except maybe if you are really big, like the US or
China.

~~~
danmaz74
> except maybe if you are really big, like the US or China

Or, potentially, the EU...

~~~
tanilama
EU is not a unified entity in terms of defense. Thought they might try to stay
away from a close tie with US under current administration, I doubt that they
can or want to get rid as an ally as whole.

~~~
glenndebacker
Not being disrespectful but the country that is a lot against unification or
more EU collaboration is leaving in March next year.

So while I'm not particular pro-brexit but I do think this could have also a
positive impact to the EU in regards of more unification or more EU
collaborations.

~~~
kryptiskt
It's not going to happen. The Nordics are skeptic against a more federal EU.
Most of Eastern Europe is too. Italy has flipped now.

Hell, even Germany are rolling their eyes at a lot of Macron's proposals.

------
nova22033
Palantir isn't "CIA code". Palantir received seed funding from In-Q-Tel. Don't
they have fact checkers and technical consultants at Bloomberg news?

~~~
falcolas
In-Q-Tel's customer is the US government. It is a VC company whose own funds
come from the Letter agencies. VCs have outsized influence on what companies
do, being investors (and in In-Q-Tel's case, BIG investors). Saying that
Palantir has been influenced by the CIA is not that huge of a leap.

> [In-Q-Tel] invests in high-tech companies for the sole purpose of keeping
> the Central Intelligence Agency, and other intelligence agencies, equipped
> with the latest in information technology in support of United States
> intelligence capability.

\- Wikipedia

> IQT is the not-for-profit strategic investor that accelerates the
> development and delivery of cutting-edge technologies to U.S. government
> agencies that keep our nation safe.

\- In-Q-Tel's About Page

~~~
Kalium
You're absolutely, completely right! In-Q-Tel is publicly owned and controlled
by the CIA.

With that said, it's worth knowing that the US government tends to use
established systems as vehicles for doing arbitrary things with money. So In-
Q-Tel winds up investing money for any government agency that wants to do it.

So while In-Q-Tel spends what is _technically_ always CIA money, it's very
possible that it could have come from anywhere in the federal government to
serve purposes that might have nothing to do with any of the CIA's goals.

------
mariushn
I didn't know about [https://www.qwant.com](https://www.qwant.com) , an
alternative to Google. Any feedback on it from personal experience?

------
aurelien
The fact is that the cyber world is under the hand of the new colonialists.

------
digitalzombie
We, the USA, is not going to have any friends left... Seems like Trump is
pissing off Canada, Mexico, NATO, and EU.

~~~
danmaz74
I (a EU citizen) still hope that Trump - and his peers over here - isn't going
to last long enough as a president to do permanent damage.

~~~
vetinari
It wasn't Trumps administration that openly spied on Merkel... and she didn't
do anything.

Five Eyes will be never a friend of continental Europe, no matter what
administration.

~~~
simonh
Western countries have always spied on each other, jostling for position and
influence. That is nothing new. Openly declaring hostile intent against an
ally - that's new. I'm not sure if people in the US really understand how
horrified everyone, of every political stripe are about Trump's behaviour
towards us and the elected Republican leadership's complicity in it.

It's not just about Trump anymore. He could be kicked out of office at the
next election, sure. But the elected republican leadership, who have their own
democratic mandate, are just rolling over and letting all this happen. If they
can't be relied on now, they can't be relied on after Trump either. As a
conservative Brit, that grew up politically during the titanic partnership
between Reagan and Maggie, this is all bewilderingly horrible.

I still remember the Falkland war and the way that, while it took the US a
while to realise what was happening, in the end here was never any real
question over here that we would be able to rely on the US in the end. I don't
think that would have been substantially different under any subsequent US
president even right up to Obama. But now? I don't think there is any such
confidence. Can you imagine a British Prime Minister worrying about what Trump
might tweet after we sank the Belgrano?

~~~
fetbaffe
EU is not really the same as the UK, especially if UK is leaving the EU.

Trumps criticism is against the EU, Trump is a nationalist, something he is
scolded for by the left, but everyone wants to forget his nationalism when it
fits the argument that he is anti-UK (or any other European country)

And not to mention, Trumps "foe" comment was in regard to trading with EU, not
a military conflict.

~~~
simonh
I'm perfectly aware he's a nationalist, why do you think I'm forgetting it?
I'm concerned principally with what he's doing because of it.

Trump's trade actions against the EU, including Britain, and other allies were
on national security grounds. He's publicly sided with Putin against his own
national security agencies. None of this is encouraging from a European
perspective.

Nobody is anticipating military conflict between the EU and US, but hostile
acts via security agencies? Especially targeting trade and economic
activities? Operations on that front that would have been inconceivable just a
few years ago cannot be discounted.

