|
|
|
|
|
by cyberax
460 days ago
|
|
> Government projects like these are not likely to really push the state-of-the-art forward. Well, if a government project can easily push you out, then you're not really a state-of-the-art. > EU subsidized clones of popular American products feels like admitting defeat. Governments need to think long-term. And one danger of relying on something like Notion is vendor lock-in. You can't easily migrate your data out of Notion, with all the rich content preserved (edit history, text comments, etc.) EU can try to mandate a common interoperability standard, but it takes years and the end result always ends up being behind the state of the art. |
|
The government could act like an immortal mega corp if it had the authority to do so. Such as pushing out competition via loss leaders. And as a bonus, with the government, every program can be a loss leader.
The funding potential for this pattern is constrained today, which is why government projects that compete with private industry are generally terrible. But, clearly, the money is there to be captured by this segment out of government funding generally, if the government is allowed to enter business directly.
The solid argument I see against allowing such actions is a slippery slope towards the above. Slippery slope arguments aren’t always correct, of course, but they aren’t always wrong either; they just point out a risk. Depending on one’s risk tolerance, it is wise to avoid slippery slopes when you can’t quantify just how steep it is.