Quotes van [[Defend Democracy o]] event w DK EU presidency cohosting. All convey an aspect of where work is needed. On each I see one could define [[Handelen 20040327155224]] as [[SC landscape van EU Dataspace]] interventions and broader.

the last one pertains to the AI / GDPR omnibus, not the data one, I think.

Intent def is there too though, much of this is entrenching, and much of it is a power grab (esp US tech at the mo), to get from capital/tech concentration to coopting governance structures

AI is a tech where by design it is not lowering a participation threshold, it positions itself as bigger-than-us, like nuclear reactors, not just anyone can run with it. That only after 3 years we see a budding diy / individual agency angle shows as much. It was only designed to create and entrench power (or transform it to another form), other digital techs originate as challenge to power, this one clearly the opposite. The companies involved fight against things that push towards smaller than us ai tech, like local offline first. E.g. DMA/DSA

History suggests this is the likely path. Most people will accept the phone, ipads and computers as they are. Like IndieWeb there is a population of people going against that current, but not a tide. Unless e.g. interoperability reqs from DSA, DMA force the issue. Sideloading is actually installing.

https://web.archive.org/web/20241127111252/https://noyb.eu/en/ads-meta-wants-be-less-illegal-much-more-annoying

Meta's next step in their malicious compliance with GDPR/DMA is making less-tracking (not non, still DOB and location used) ads more annoying than tracking ones. Another round of delaying tactics to clearly spelled out legal reqs: no perceptible diff in service allowed.

iAwriter pointing out that from their perspective G and A appstores don't compete but divvy things up between them. A 20B USD / 17,5% revenue deal makes it tangible. Say they appreciate the DMA because of it.

Matrix seeing DMA as supportive towards their goal of open web's communication layer. Actively demo'ng Android interoperability while preserving E2EE, and participating in IETF / MIMI ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/mimi/about/ )

https://web.archive.org/web/20240911121048/https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2024/facing-reality-in-the-eu-and-tech/

Bookmarking it belatedly, bc I find I regularly point to it when discussing the mischaracterisation by big tech of the DMA scope, regulations and purpose, esp Apple this year.

The article calls 'a 5g moment' the moment of realisation that dependencies in a tech may erode strategic position, by letting critical infrastructure to be controlled by tech firms that can be influenced by other governments. In the case of 5g it's Huawei and Chinese gov, in the case of cloud it's GAM and US gov. This is not a new notion, it is why the EU digital and data legal framework was created the past 4 yrs, so why this paper now?

DMA level cloud services in 3rd countries provide reliable technology but do not bring trust, security and diversification at a level needed for cloud sovereignty

https://web.archive.org/web/20230930153114/https://ia.net/topics/unraveling-the-digital-markets-act

ia writer and their positive take on the EU DMA from their business perspective. Then again, they actually read the thing which most others don't seem to have done. No mention though of the connection to the DSA, AIR or GDPR who all 4 together mean a lot more than each individually.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism

strong gov regulatory involvement to ensure competition in markets, preventing the rise of monopolistic/oligopolistic powers that would undermine markets and translate economic power into political power undermining democratic structures.

ordo after ORDO, a economic/legal academic journal in which ordoliberalism was first theorised. "Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft". Published sice 1948, still yearly editions.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220902092000/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40926-022-00213-4

Places DMA and general EU competition policy in (German) ordoliberalism. Might be an interesting discussion v-a-v 'stifling innovation' charges from neoliberal BigTech noises. I read DMA as very much focused on level playing field. Needs to be read together with the DSA (and AIR) to better see those contours I suppose. So wondering about if this paper looks at DMA insularly or within the context of the entire EU geopolitical proposition that is currently begin created with the legal framework around digital/data (DMA, DSA, AIR, DGA, DA, GDPR, ODD)