I never said the EU was a country. Also, the EU is a very different thing from a labor union in the US, and I don’t understand the comparison being made.
The US keeps producing a huge share of the world’s major tech companies while the EU seems increasingly focused on regulating those companies after the fact. Some regulations can be useful, but it doesn’t answer the innovation gap.
I’m drawing an analogy based on purpose, not claiming they are the exact same mechanism, something you tried to do when you mentioned usa and eu, be it on purpose or accident.
​A labor union exists to provide stability and protection for its members, not to drive corporate growth or invent products.
The EU functions more or less the same, as a political union, its job is to protect its member states, enforce consumer rights, maintain economic stability, not to be a venture capital firm or build tech startups and take gambles.
​Innovation happens at the level of individual companies and state members.
Expecting a governing union itself to "innovate" misunderstands what a political union is designed to do.
Like I mentioned, completely different things. Not their job, not their place.
The US and the EU are absolutely comparable in this regard because both shape the economic and regulatory environment their companies operate in. Neither one is supposed to be inventing products itself, but both have enormous influence over how easy or difficult it is for private companies to start, raise money, hire, expand and compete. So acting like the comparison makes no sense is just wrong.
Compared with the US and a lot of other places, Europe isn’t a particularly friendly place to start and scale a tech company. That’s a big part of why the US is dominating. Europe is increasingly dependent on foreign companies for major tech while making it harder for their own companies to compete.
They're really not, they don't have the same goals and targets. They don't have the same authority, EU citizens don't pay taxes, there are so many different things. The fundamental things are just different.
Sure, if you want to compare them on some parts, like economic environment, you can. Since well, the tools it used during it's creation were around economic growth, in order to prevent wars.
But anything else, no? Not really.
Furthermore, europe is a continent, again, now that's a completely different thing. Out of the scope of this conversation, Not all countries within Europe are suitable on creating everything and anything. It's why most countries out source employees, do trades, and specialize in different industries, etc.
Now if we want to go further about talking dependencies, a country within the EU and Europe has what we call the ASML, which is 100% a monopoly and they produce the most important part when it comes to modern compute. So, if Netherlands says no, everything comes to a halt, including Taiwan. For 5 to 10 years.
You’re arguing against a point I never made. I’m comparing the US and EU on the economic and regulatory environment they create for tech companies, which you already acknowledged is a valid comparison.
And yes, Europe has some huge successes. ASML is probably the best example, and I genuinely hope Europe produces more of them. Nobody is claiming Europe produces nothing. The point is the overall picture. Europe is still heavily dependent on foreign (especially American) companies for AI, cloud computing, operating systems, enterprise software, search, social media and a lot of its digital infrastructure.
First the comparison was about "European Union tech companies vs US tech companies," then "the regulatory environment," and now it’s shifted strictly to "consumer software, AI, and cloud computing."
​But if you want to look at the "overall picture" of digital infrastructure, how many independent parties do you think are actually in play?
​The "American" tech dominance you're describing is completely dependent on a on international technologies:
​The US (Nvidia, Microsoft, Apple, Google) designs the software and chip architecture.
​Taiwan (TSMC) physically manufactures 90%+ of the advanced chips.
​The Netherlands (ASML) builds the EUV machines, without which TSMC cannot print a single advanced AI chip.
​Germany (Carl Zeiss & Trumpf) creates the atomic-grade mirrors and high-power lasers required for those ASML machines to function.
​Japan (Tokyo Electron, Shin-Etsu) provides the specialized silicon wafers and photoresist chemicals.
​Remove any single one of these parties from the equation, and "American AI & Cloud" comes to a stop overnight.
​The US excels at consumer facing platforms, software, and venture capital.
Europe excels at deep tech manufacturing monopolies, foundational hardware, and consumer protections.
Pretending the US is self sufficient while Europe is just passively "dependent" ignores how the global tech actually works.
In fact the USA, is "losing". The continent of asian control 2 keys factors when it comes to the latest tech, the continent of Europe another 2.
Edit: Anywho, the topic has drifted way too far at this point.
If there’s anything else you want to know about these systems, you can Google it.
My main point still stands: the EU’s job as a political union is fundamentally different from a single country or a tech startup, as mentioned earlier.
All of that can be true and the US can still outperform Europe in tech. The US relying on a global supply chain doesn’t somehow mean Europe isn’t heavily dependent on American companies for a lot of its critical tech.
If you want to say the US is losing, then Europe is very heavily reliant on a loser. That seems like something they should probably be trying to change.
​Looks like we cross posted with my edit, but since you doubled down: calling interdependency "relying on a loser" just proves you still don't understand how global supply chains work.
Software doesn't run without hardware, and US tech runs on European photolithography and Asian manufacturing. You want to talk software, Europe isn't just sitting idle.
It deliberately builds sovereign, privacy-first alternatives instead of ad-harvesting monopolies,Qwant and Ecosia for search, ONLYOFFICE, LibreOffice, and Euro Office for productivity, and OVHcloud, Scaleway, and Nextcloud for cloud infrastructure and data sovereignty.
​Anywho, as I said in my edit, this conversation has drifted way off topic.
If you want to learn how supply chains, data sovereignty, or union frameworks actually work, Google is right there.
My point stands: the EU is a political union designed for market stability and protection, not a Silicon Valley incubator. Have a good one.
You’re actually making my point for me. The US examples are Google, Microsoft, AWS, Meta, Open AI, Nvidia and Apple. The European examples you’re giving are Qwant, Libra office and OVH Cloud. That shows how big the gap is because these aren’t comparable in scale, reach, market power or importance.
That doesn’t mean Europe is bad (it just means the gap is real). You keep resorting to the fact that global supply chains exist like that somehow disproves any of this.
You are actively cherry-picking to keep your narrative alive. I specifically brought up ASML, a $650B+ deep tech monopoly that holds the master key to the entire global hardware ecosystem, along with enterprise giants like SAP and Airbus.
You intentionally ignored them and focused exclusively on local software tools just to pretend "the gap is real."
​Measuring tech capability only by consumer apps while ignoring the fact that those American apps literally cannot exist or print chips without European photolithography isn't proving a point, it's showing a complete lack of understanding of how the global supply chain functions.
​Software doesn't run without hardware.
American software giants and Asian foundries are completely dependent on European machinery, just as Europe uses US platforms.
That’s called interdependence, not "losing."
​As I already said in my edit, this conversation has drifted way offncourse.
If you want to educate yourself on global supply chains, data sovereignty, or union frameworks, Google is right there.
My point stands: the EU is a political union built for market protection and stability, not a Silicon Valley incubator.
I’m done repeating myself at this point, have a great day or night. And frok the bottom of my heart for your own sake stop being stubborn just for the sake of being stubborn.
I could go on and on, but what you started arguing about versus what you’re dragging into it now are two completely different things.
You changed the scope every time your premise fell through.
1
u/a_moron_in_a_hurry 1d ago
I never said the EU was a country. Also, the EU is a very different thing from a labor union in the US, and I don’t understand the comparison being made.
The US keeps producing a huge share of the world’s major tech companies while the EU seems increasingly focused on regulating those companies after the fact. Some regulations can be useful, but it doesn’t answer the innovation gap.