Rather, different providers can offer services and (compute) nodes with different levels of certification / geographic location.
So a government agency / hospital / critical-Infrastructure on can use cloud offerings without loosing „digital sovereignty“ by depending on single providers or outside actors.
Devils advocate: So you get this EU-verified catalogue which lets you pick your vendor lock-in between Amazon, Microsoft, and Google just like before.
The most common answer to this problem given by the people behind this is „but there is a legal contract backing the data exchange and the governing body”. Nothing different than what we have today.
> We, representatives of the German Federal Government, business and science communities, are striving to set up a high-performance, competitive, secure and trustworthy data infrastructure for Europe. To this end, we have drawn up the foundations for a federated, open data infrastructure based on European values, giving it the provisional pro-ject name ‘GAIA-X’.
Here's the executive summary: https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Publikationen/Digitale-Welt...
AWS can be so successful because they do everything themselves as part of an integrated whole. Trying to make disparate (European!) services work together and somehow end up as a cohesive package is a recipe for disaster.
An equivalent European player can not be a bunch of separate companies each doing their own thing.
It's there that the old lumbering beasts of EU IT (eg Bull) will turn it into the equivalent of Web Services.
A searchable catalog of all say virtual machines across countries & providers would be pretty cool for starters.
Don't quite see how they're going to get around stuff being in different physical locations. That creates latency, cost and reliability headaches that AWS/GCP/Azure doesn't need to deal with since you normally put say DB and VM into the same data center
GAIA-X self-descriptions give visibility on whether your data is (would be) in a data center that also has GPU-capacities. And if not, what you would have to pay for interconnection.
See this demo for the basic idea of the self-description graph: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f17c3Vpi3rA
Thanks for the vid. The app they're demonstrating seems to be publicly accessible too:
Yea.. so basically you have a catalogue but it's going to be up to the consumers or providers to find a way to stitch up a clearinghouse solution for dynamically orchestrated services from a multitude of providers. This is not only hard. It's near impossible. Without this crucial element, the platform is stillborn.
So you can take your prototype build on a server in $european_country_1 and publish it on the cloud of $european_country_2 once the dev is done without any change except the billing address.
If this is what you propose, this will be yet another stillborn project (Hey AI4EU!)
I'm also curious how much is this going to be a "openstack does this, let's just adopt it" decision. (The Catalog, some Federation, etc.)
Perhaps the limited presence of big, powerful and influential FAANG like companies significantly reduce the lobby or pressure on the European governments to take the necessary actions to guard and protect their citizens' data.
Hopefully this can provide the right fundamentals and creates impetus for more personal data friendly localhost first and cloud second software paradigm. This paradigm is more natural and secure than the cloud first software paradigm currently being practiced by major software companies (e.g. FAANG).
I tought we agreed the semantic web was a failed experiment? Stop trying to bring it back "because it looks smart"