I'm not sure EU will resent the US. Why do you think so? By that logic Russia will start resenting China and try to decouple real soon. EU needs US for the nuclear umbrella. Their nukes are not enough for MAD equilibrium with Russia.
Also, a weakened Russia that defers to China is actually very good for the West. It is not so great for China posturing either, as China is perceived as standing alone against a unified West.
Especially because Russia was the only strong ally China had. Now all their allies are weak. And they're surrounded by hostile powers.
Russia military reputation was severely damaged. Not saying they're not dangerous, but certainly not as much as many imagined.
One of the main causes is the massive corruption in their military. China suffers from the same internal issue. No one can say whether the levels of corruption are similar, but it casts a dark shadow over China's military trustworthiness.
NATO, on the other hand, has proved capable of successfully supporting a weak country against a much greater military power without even stepping foot in battle.
Maybe the most important contributions from NATO (by NATO, read 80% the US) was in strategy and tactics. If they just had sent weapons without good strategy and tactics, the outcome would have been different.
What a badly written piece. It creates a narrative simply by juxtaposing unrelated and inaccurate facts in the same paragraph. For example, Covid tracking or apps utilize phones location services, same ones that pinpoint phone location for road navigation. These apps were tried in many countries and found mostly ineffective and intrusive. This has nothing to do with phone hacking, NSO etc. Talking about Covid and Pegasus in the same paragraph without additional context just doesn't make sense. Mentioning Bennett and NSO CEO together might try to create some link that just isn't there either.
Contrary to the picture painted in the article, most Israeli cyber companies, including most unicorns in this space, are dealing with defensive cyber (intrusion detection/prevention, anti-malware etc).
The IDF unit associated with cyber is 8200. Unit 81 mostly creates new hardware/electronics.
The Israeli officer who committed suicide while incarcerated wasn't an Israeli Snowden. The unofficial version/rumor is that he intended to start an
unsanctioned cyber attack that would have exposed some secret capabilities. And so on.
Before pulling out, it might be worth it to try to charge for Android, or some freemium model. If half of EU Android users will pay 10 euros a year to get in-car integration and youtube access, it should offset any EU fines.
In light of the Raven reveals from 2019 [0], I don't see what makes NSO stand apart and get so much bad rep (besides the obvious fact that any spyware is bad). In Raven, ex-NSA contractors not only supplied the spyware but actually helped operate it on-site, at least in the UAE. My guess would be that NSO et al compete with US-based players on price, not effectiveness.
So the angle I find fascinating is the amount of pile-on on NSO/Israel this campaign effectively generates. Anti Israeli sentiment has become the watering hole where wokes and alts of all stripes can get their fuzzies and co-exist (at least for a while :/)
[0] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-spyi....
The Hacker Team, a similar Italy based outfit were hacked to death several years ago. Seemed quite fitting. Talking about legalities when they supply governments (India is still a democracy btw) sounds naive.
Seems a bit patronizing. People can actually make a conscious decision to prefer convenience over surrender of some privacy. Some people don't put shades or curtains on their windows.
Sure, but people generally understand how window shades work, whereas people generally don't understand how the surveillance economy works. That would be a patronizing assumption inside HN, but outside HN it's a reality that I regularly observe.
tl;dr: the net and facebook in particular favors content that provokes fear and irrationality, including stoking fear with fake news. This will usually favor the populist/right-wing candidate. Here's the thing: the real issues are scarier than any fake news. Climate change, rising inequality, healthcare, populism/alt-right/post-truth and a lunatic in the oval office. If a democratic candidate can't translate these issues into fear and loathing that will sweep the majority, then it's on them. They just need to stop trying to be likable and start playing by the facebook rules. Then they can actually make good use of it and win.
I don't get the point on complaining over the "mindshare size" of the faang products. As, I don't think it's a thing you can complain about. If it were, the french would be right to complain about English mindshare globally (they can complain but they can't sue). Also, you can compete locally with faang, like China and Russia are doing. Admittedly they use restrictions on foreign tech, but you also need to have high quality products that are catering for the local market. EU are the ones that feel uncomfortable being dominated by US tech companies, but it's not like they don't have options.
It seems from the comments that people are trying to find an easy way out from the dilemma - like supposing 2 different 'I's or the same 'I' that partakes in 2 different worlds/realities. The reading that I like better is this: given the same frame of reference (same 'I', same reality) to both parts of the sentence, does it represent a logical fallacy?
