whining about only apply to them, not small startups

No, to the point blue sky, not exactly big tech, is struggling to comply, after being called out.

They said they will, it’s not even bad faith.

Contrary to common beliefs, regulations strongly favour big companies, because they have the resources to keep up with burocracy, while gatekeeping smaller companies

The problem isn’t VC money either, because American and global funds invest in European companies too, there aren’t just as many eligible ones.

Most successful start up in Europe still decide to get listen on american exchanges (see the recent klarna case) This is purely because of favorable environment lol

Fuck them, if they have to stay, follow our laws

I mean, I really don’t care, but that’s exactly how european economy remained, keep doing the same thing expecting a different outcome doesn’t seem smart

And no, Volkswagen is the 10th company in the world by revenues, it’s not dumping, European manufacturers simply can’t keep the pace. The most sold EV in Europe right now is Tesla lol

The assumption is excessive regulation is one of the reason we don’t have a domestic tech industry

While I don’t think it’s necessary the main factor, for sure it’s partially true

If Apple, Google, Microsoft and other big tech are cautious and struggling to bring features in Europe while being compliance, I can’t imagine how an european start up could trive as their starting market here

You can’t really deregulate domestic companies only

Slow down

It’s the same Union that wants to ban cryptography in instant messaging apps. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes…well

This is practically impossible because piracy is easy and convenient.

Ads emerged right because they are a simpler way of monetization

your comment has been reported to the competent authority of the Interplanetary European Empire, an IEE official will contact you soon for reprisal

You pay for internet connection, not internet content.

Services don’t get a penny out of what you pay your ISP

You’re absolutely right, but this is a different case I think: It’s freerider problem, people WANT to use internet services, want to use social and so on, the problem is, if possible, they don’t want to pay for it. In the scenario where we make ads completely illegal, companies will look for other ways to monetize the service, because a system which is not in break even on the long term is cursed to bankruptcy.

People want to watch Netflix, but without paying, that means that if everyone do like that, Netflix will find other ways of monetization. That’s why games became full of microtransanction and always online stuff, for example. That’s what made ads popular in the first place, don’t want to pay? No problem, here’s a free sites with ads. should socials be closed community where you can access only paying, like pay tv? Because even right now removing ads on Reddit or YouTube paying is possible.

Even Lemmy growth at a certain point will incur in this, because a platform can’t hold itself on 2 unpaid developers and free labor of volunteers who pay for server costs too.

Would we better off without these sites if we’re not willing to pay for them? Maybe yes. But what certain is that without financial stability a project can’t go far. The problem is both of the producer of the producer, sure, but also its users should wonder how much they want the platform, because it will evolve accordingly.

I use ChromeOS