[oefrha]

You’re not wrong, it’s a hell lot more exciting to watch players organically emerging from a competitive landscape with stuff you can put your hands on today (or next week) than players hand-picked and tasked by governments, making hollow announcements before they have anything interesting to show.

[tigroferoce]

It's not just that. It's that the rest of the world is moving at light speed compared with EU. If people in EU want this project to survive, they need to change attitude, a lot.

If they are OK to let the EU project fail, they need to consider what the world will be. Europe has never been composed of dwarfs, but that's what every single EU country has become in the past 50 years.

Without US influence, away from big players, with less and less performant economies and industries, without a plan, with a difficult neighbour to address... it's going to be extremely difficult for Europe.

[alienthrowaway]

> Europe has never been composed of dwarfs, but that's what every single EU country has become in the past 50 years

How do CERN, ESA and Airbus fit into this worldview? They are unquestionably giants in their respective fields, from my POV.

I'm fully cognisant of SpaceX vs Arianne in reusability, but that is cancelled out by outcomes/culture at Boeing vs Airbus. Broadly speaking general, Europe is either number 1 or number 2 (behind the US) in engineering and hard sciences; there's no reason to give up because they fall to #4 or 5 in some fields like software, or "AI" specifically, especially since I'm convinced that the irrational exuberance in the US will come to an end when (not if) investors start demanding the illusive ROI on AI investments. When the music stops, a lot of the "advanced" AI companies that look amazing now will be insolvent, but Euro projects will still be funded.