• 73ms@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Well a stronger version of digital sovereignty that requires open source with appropriate governance and appropriate licensing could also mean serving every user’s interests.

    Of course interests of the European governments also probably align much better overall with the interests of European citizens than the US government interests and they can be influenced much more by European citizens democratically.

    • deadcream@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Open source? One that’s developed by people all over the world, including US, China and Russia? And Linux, whose lead maintainer is an American citizen, and which is developed in the large part by US and Chinese corporations? Doesn’t sound very sovereign to me.

      • 73ms@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I mean I did not even specify any particular open source project that you could infer any particular nationalities developing from so it’s pretty bad faith trying to straw man me like this. Furthermore you seem to have completely misunderstood what I was saying.

        • deadcream@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          My point is that “sovereignty” implies ownership and specific jurisdiction. You can’t just take any open source project and say that you are “sovereign”. It would only make sense if that project accepts only European contributors and vets them.

          Open source does not imply “european”.