zlacker

[return to "France Aiming to Replace Zoom, Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, etc."]
1. softwa+Fk[view] [source] 2026-01-26 17:48:48
>>bwb+(OP)
Americans fail to appreciate a few things about our economy

1. We have a large homgoneous market where you can build a product and it’s expected it can succeed for hundreds of millions of Americans

2. EU is the easiest second market, and another step change of hundreds of millions of customers in a somewhat unified market

3. there’s not an easy 3rd economy that replaces EUs wealth, population, and comfort with English + technology

When we piss everyone off in the EU tech company growth gets kneecapped and limited to US / Canada. Theres not an easy market to expand to without much deeper focus on that specific market and its needs, for much fewer returns.

◧◩
2. beloch+aL[view] [source] 2026-01-26 19:50:02
>>softwa+Fk
Don't take the Canadian market for granted.

There's a strong desire to forge closer links with the EU now and reduce dependence on products that could be weaponized against us at any time. Geographic proximity doesn't count for much when it comes to software.

◧◩◪
3. xp84+tk1[view] [source] 2026-01-26 22:51:43
>>beloch+aL
> weaponized against us

I take a more optimistic stance here. Trump can only live so long, and everybody except basically Trump and John Bolton knows that the majority of his idiotic tariffs (and nonsensical belligerence like pretending NATO control of Greenland doesn't meet all our defense needs) are wealth-destroying on net, as well as wealth-destroying for at least 10x the number of people than they help (many of them I'd say 100-1000x as many). When Trump leaves the stage, those who replace him will either be Democrats sprinting at full speed from all his policies to demonstrate how not-Trump they are, or Republicans who want to grow the economy. Either way, the stupidity in a lot of his policies is a temporary condition.

Note that I'm not saying everyone should give the US a pass or maintain as much economic and defense dependency on the US. But I think it's hyperbolic to make all your long-term plans assuming something as stupid and self-defeating as his worst anti-ally policies are a new normal, because they harm the US at least as much as they harm everyone else, and everyone but those two knows this.

◧◩◪◨
4. auciss+tp1[view] [source] 2026-01-26 23:16:31
>>xp84+tk1
Americans elected trump not just one time. They did it twice.

They all knew who he was by the end of the first mandate yet they still elected him again.

Why wouldn’t they find another « trump like » when trump goes away ? Vance or someone else, the list is long.

I see no reason for things to change and that’s if the USA doesn’t become an autocracy in the meantime. Trump already did so much in a year, that’s fascinating. He just need to boil the frog a bit longer but everything is in place.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. ryandr+0E1[view] [source] 2026-01-27 00:51:56
>>auciss+tp1
Exactly. Trump is just a symptom. If he disappeared tomorrow, the people who elected him are still here, and they still want the same things: Belligerence, Cruelty, Isolationism, and lots of other terrible things. When Trump is no longer in the picture, they'll find a new candidate who offers this.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. xp84+2F1[view] [source] 2026-01-27 00:59:12
>>ryandr+0E1
You don't have to convince every Trump voter. The margin who swung from Biden to Trump and elected Trump aren't all those things. They just don't want what the Dems were selling in 2024, specifically: the dems' adopted ideology surrounding gender, plus using race and gender to pick who gets jobs and into schools, rather than merit. If they removed just those two planks from the DNC platform, (1) Harris would have never been nominated, and (2) Trump couldn't have won.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. sherma+5R1[view] [source] 2026-01-27 02:32:44
>>xp84+2F1
This is the logic of running to the middle. And yet moderate candidates do poorly these days.

Worth noting who gives this advice and to whom.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. termin+p92[view] [source] 2026-01-27 05:39:16
>>sherma+5R1
Who was the moderate candidate? We had Trump and a candidate who wanted to continue the open borders policy and racial quota system in hiring and university admissions.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. JCatth+E92[view] [source] 2026-01-27 05:41:38
>>termin+p92
Moderate/smoderate. There was an insane choice, which people chose to vote to the detriment of most, and a sane candidate, which people rejected due to misinformation and bigotry.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. mlrtim+kL2[view] [source] 2026-01-27 10:50:32
>>JCatth+E92
>misinformation and bigotry

Please don't keep repeating this, this is why Democrats lost. Being out of touch.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧
11. JCatth+F63[view] [source] 2026-01-27 13:21:50
>>mlrtim+kL2
No, they lost because much of the population is bigoted and did fall for misinformation. People started sharing the nonsense about Haitians eating cats and dogs, they fell for the transpanic ads...and many were still not comfortable with a woman in charge. Misinformation and bigotry, and it's not out of touch to recognize that.

The problem is with the people more than the party, and fighting that so we can actually progress the country out of the dark ages is an uphill battle.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨
12. xp84+KM3[view] [source] 2026-01-27 16:31:00
>>JCatth+F63
No, it seriously was not that. We didn't refuse to vote for Harris because of the idiotic cats nonsense. It was in large part her and the whole DNC's explicit embrace of DEI (note: "i don't like DEI" isn't anti-minority. Plenty of minorities also want to get jobs and admitted to schools because they qualify for and earn those things and not as a free handout because of their skin).

Not 20 years ago, like 90% of Americans would have agreed that it's insane to use racial quotas and different standards of qualification for different groups. Today, the 20% or so who disagree with me on that have dragged the DNC into this unpopular position, abandoning a lot of their previous voters. This has consequences.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨◲
13. JCatth+lx4[view] [source] 2026-01-27 19:28:01
>>xp84+KM3
And for that you threw the entire country away? Based on mostly fear and misunderstanding? There was another user I saw on here who defended voting for T because, despite apparently having always voted D in the past, he "could not look his white teenage sons in the eye and tell them he voted for people that would make them the enemy" - what absolute nonsense.

DEI may have gone too far in some areas, but that would largely be corporations trying to cash in, not anything planned by the possible Harris administration, and nothing demonstrable by the Biden administration.

[go to top]