I think if you want full homomorphic encryption, you have to go for the worst case. So you always pull all the model? That's usually why FHE is not practical.
Slack belongs to Salesforce (US), Discord is based in the US, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Apple...
Not saying this is better, but is definitely not worse. At least in Europe there is the GDPR, whereas in the US there is a president officially supporting corruption [1].
If you care about privacy, you have to go for open source end-to-end encryption. Probably Signal. At least this you can self-host.
I believe the image of the US in the West started changing considerably during Trump's first mandate. Biden coming back hasn't completely repaired that change, but really it mostly came back (as in, "The US screwed up with Trump, but that's done now").
I think the 6 weeks of this second mandate have already made irreparable damage. When during the first mandate people tended to be "fed up with the US bullshit", now they are genuinely scared. Trump was not a one-off mistake. The people not only confirmed it, but seems generally okay with what's happening now; some Americans complain, but mostly when they are personally affected, it seems. It doesn't seem like the US people is shocked by the idea of destabilising the West. Not saying it is the case, but that is how it seems.
The trust is gone, I don't think it will come back. To the West, the US are partners, not friends anymore. It's still better than enemies, even though the US has been considering it... seemingly with the support of the people.
> Personally, I'm looking forward now for Europe to become self-reliant on technology.
Yeah, in a way, if Europe managed to be independent militarily, that would bring some stability. Let's hope they go there!
Right. So the question is: given that NATO is now a lot weaker because of the US, it's not clear whether the promises of mutual defence still hold. Do I understand that correctly?
The F-35 is an expensive, very criticised (even inside the US) plane and the US notoriously have some kind of backdoor to it. It makes no sense to me that the EU would buy F-35 other than as a way to give money to the US ("buying protection").
The only obligations it imposes, besides not attacking Ukraine, is to seek UN Security Council action should Ukraine be nuked. I don't know why people keep trotting it out like it's a comprehensive defense pact.
> On a more practical level, they would need to ditch the Maastricht rules on fiscal discipline
I think this has been suggested by Ursula von der Leyen. Europe has to get united and get to the point where it can defend itself. The US has definitely proven that they are unreliable, so it has to be done. But it will take some time, and in the meantime Europe has to rely on the US. If not as allies, then as partners.
The US have been threatening to become enemies, but that's not (yet) the case, which is why the EU is still considering relying on a partner.
Almost nothing of relevance can be done overnight, but the first step is always the most important one. I haven't heard of that comment by vdL yet, maybe they're ready to take it, but the proof is in the pudding.
"Von der Leyen outlined the five-point plan at a critical time for the future of Europe's security.
One of them is a proposal to suspend strict budget rules to allow member states to ramp up "their defence expenditures without triggering the excessive deficit procedure," Von der Leyen said.[1]"
reply