Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU Voice

social.network.europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 250 posts

Re: EU Voice

#101

Post by jacooper »

drstewart wrote: post #97
jacooper wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand why the EU bothers wasting money on these initiatives Because they don't cost much? If at all? > Why don't they buy a considerable stake in these American social media companies instead of trying to reinvent the wheel that is deflating as soon as it launches. Because if they did, the US is going to freak out about foreign influence. just look at how the media is reporting on Saudi Arabia investin…

>the US is going to freak out about foreign influence The irony of posing this as hysterical considering 99% of this thread is people saying "Good! The EU shouldn't be dependent on foreign influences!!"

Well, he is asking why the EU is not trying to influence US tech.

Re: EU Voice

#103

Post by pelasaco »

scrollaway wrote: post #96
pelasaco wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because they don't cost much? If at all? You are probably wrong here, but would be nice if EU was transparent enough to tell us how much it costs. It is a server management, patch management, content management, and etc.. i can imagine that isn't as cheap as you think, done by EU employees that are normally well paid.

I live in Brussels and have many friends in the EU bubble. EU employees are not as well paid as you think. The main perk has to do with how they’re taxed which is greatly advantageous and makes their salary look higher than most peers.

Well, they are well paid if you analyze their output. I worked there. I know how goal oriented they are.

Re: EU Voice

#104

Post by pelasaco »

jacooper wrote: post #94
pelasaco wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because they don't cost much? If at all? You are probably wrong here, but would be nice if EU was transparent enough to tell us how much it costs. It is a server management, patch management, content management, and etc.. i can imagine that isn't as cheap as you think, done by EU employees that are normally well paid.

Its an Instance only for EU officials, there aren't many users.

Their staff is around 32k. people. But still server maintenance, content management, etc.. I would love to know how much such services costs to us.

Re: EU Voice

#105

Post by seydor »

pelasaco wrote: post #87

who are paying for that? Why EU decides to manage such infrastructure?

it s in the budget of some agency supervising the data protection supervisors.

This is not where a lot of money is wasted however. If you want to look for EU waste, look into the various agencies travel grants, endless committees and conferences, overhiring and bureaucratic reports that are many times longer than the actual output. I think in these times of fiscal tightening, people shopuld be more aware of the cost of EUrocracy

Re: EU Voice

#106

Post by piva00 »

yrgulation wrote: post #102

The EU and any political organisation need to stay away from our social networks.

That's why they are introducing their own federated server to keep their communications under their own corner of the internet instead of your social network.

Re: EU Voice

#107

Post by piva00 »

Telemakhos wrote: post #42
iLoveOncall wrote: post #22

It always baffled me that so many governments relied on a private solution that only has 5% of the world population as users (Twitter) as the preferred mode of communication with their citizens. It's good to see a solution made by the government instead. The next step is to make it mandatory for officials to use this platform (and Twitter or Facebook in addition if they want to, I don't care) for all their official c…

Why replace press releases and web pages with a social microblog? "Official communication" sounds like something better handled in long-form reports than short notes jotted out into a social maelstrom of hot takes. Perhaps the next step might instead be to get government off social media altogether.

One is a pull-based system (official press releases, web pages), the other is a push-based announcement system. They can communicate the same messages but delivery is quite different.

Re: EU Voice

#108

Post by Sargos »

johnywalks wrote: post #49
williamvds wrote: post #18

It's quite sensible really, why would you leave a method of disseminating official statements vulnerable to the whims of a private American corporation? Discussion still can and will be held on platforms not directly controlled by governments.

> whims of a private American corporation Exactly. Private corporations that adhere to US law and have demonstrated that they don't operate in good faith. Each country should control official channels of communication.

>Each country should control official channels of communication.

I don't want to create 100 accounts to access each countries totally unique and special websites. It's a bad system and ultimately will lead to less discourse and not more.

Re: EU Voice

#109

Post by jacooper »

arlort wrote: post #95
jacooper wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand why the EU bothers wasting money on these initiatives Because they don't cost much? If at all? > Why don't they buy a considerable stake in these American social media companies instead of trying to reinvent the wheel that is deflating as soon as it launches. Because if they did, the US is going to freak out about foreign influence. just look at how the media is reporting on Saudi Arabia investin…

> mastodon/puretube.official.eu would've been better That's what europa.eu is, it's the official domain of the EU, every subdomain of europa.eu is an official website of the EU > > Their first video that appears on the website "The future of data protection: Effective enforcement in the digital world - full video" is 1 week old and has 27 views I just thought to check but funnily enough the exact same video posted on…

> That's what europa.eu is, it's the official domain of the EU, every subdomain of europa.eu is an official website of the EU

They should remove `.network` then

Re: EU Voice

#110

Post by olivierduval »

Sadly, as usual with Europe, a really good idea and... a very poor marketing!

Mastodon is supposed to be a kind of Twitter replacement... so why not using the "public timeline" (https://social.network.europa.eu/public) as the landing page??? It would allow everybody to see that mastodon is not more complicated than twitter and would be more interesting than https://social.network.europa.eu/about/more or even https://social.network.europa.eu !!!

I really don't get it. :-(

As long as Europa won't be able to make interesting things catchy for everybody, all these good ideas will just stay unused and lost

Post reply on HN