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

ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

binnenlandsbestuur.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 229 posts

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#141

Post by shreddit »

pureagave wrote: post #119
KaiserPro wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theres a difference between as an intelligence organisation having access to data, and "someone in power is angry because they watched a TV advert, I want to see what they know" but, your over all picture is still, sadly correct.

For most of my life I also used to think there was a difference between the two. But now I realized they are actually just the same.

They couldn’t be more different. One is doing it in secrecy and for a “reason”, to spy on someone. The other one will do it in public because he can and doesn’t like your name.

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#142

Post by SuperNinKenDo »

nitwit005 wrote: post #49
bawolff wrote: post #16

I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. USA has been very hostile to the ICC under trump, but its not exactly a huge shift, bush was also incredibly hostile. It seems borderline incompetent to use a microsoft cloud offering given the political situation. Not to mention given the type of work they do, seems like hosting stuff off site at all is a bad plan.

It's basically the "No one gets fired for buying IBM" effect. Microsoft became the default. Everyone was familiar with it, and knew it would work.

I agree this is a big part of it.

Office sucks?: "Man Office sucks these days."

The "weird" alternative you expended political capital to put everyone on works slightly differently or lacks a feature out of the box?: "What were you thinking?!"

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#143

Post by lysace »

stackskipton wrote: post #139
lukan wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is international law. It is made up of all the treaties the big and small powers implemented together. But yes, not much is left now, but I would argue before Bush and 9/11 .. it was in a way better shape. Global military is not necessary, just consensus to enforce it. Practical example, there is no EU military, but there surely are EU laws EU members have to follow.

>Practical example, there is no EU military, but there surely are EU laws EU members have to follow. EU has other levers to enforce compliance like ejection from Eurozone or Schengen Area. Global military is required to enforce it because biggest stick wins. Many countries thinks Russia should be removed from Ukraine but no one has stepped up to provide the military to do so, ergo, in violation of international law t…

Trade is a vector, obviously.

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#144

Post by statguy »

shreddit wrote: post #141
pureagave wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most of my life I also used to think there was a difference between the two. But now I realized they are actually just the same.

They couldn’t be more different. One is doing it in secrecy and for a “reason”, to spy on someone. The other one will do it in public because he can and doesn’t like your name.

does it matter if you are the one on the receiving end?

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#145

Post by KaiserPro »

pureagave wrote: post #119
KaiserPro wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theres a difference between as an intelligence organisation having access to data, and "someone in power is angry because they watched a TV advert, I want to see what they know" but, your over all picture is still, sadly correct.

For most of my life I also used to think there was a difference between the two. But now I realized they are actually just the same.

I understand the disillusionment. The gutting of the US machinery of state is disheartening to see.

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#146

Post by lukan »

stackskipton wrote: post #139
lukan wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is international law. It is made up of all the treaties the big and small powers implemented together. But yes, not much is left now, but I would argue before Bush and 9/11 .. it was in a way better shape. Global military is not necessary, just consensus to enforce it. Practical example, there is no EU military, but there surely are EU laws EU members have to follow.

>Practical example, there is no EU military, but there surely are EU laws EU members have to follow. EU has other levers to enforce compliance like ejection from Eurozone or Schengen Area. Global military is required to enforce it because biggest stick wins. Many countries thinks Russia should be removed from Ukraine but no one has stepped up to provide the military to do so, ergo, in violation of international law t…

"Many countries thinks Russia should be removed from Ukraine but no one has stepped up to provide the military to do so, ergo, in violation of international law they remain."

I would argue, or rather I know many people from poorer countries argue, that why should they care that russia violates international law etc. if the US blatantly ignored it when they invaded Iraq? In other words, it is the same international like it is in the EU, just with less trust. Also the EU might fail (and there are challenges) if too many members act against the common interest. Then the enforcement will fail and so will all of EU.

(also, with international support and china not backing russia ... it would have worked without military involvement. Then the sanctioned would have worked. So ... some countries are just happy for the cheap bargain for russian oil)

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#147

Post by cachius »

repelsteeltje wrote: post #47
munk-a wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lobbying - and likely a fair amount of network pressure from legal systems in various nations that lean towards using office for internal documents as a default.

That, and it's solid, well supported software most people are familiar with. From those doing the paperwork with Microsoft procurement for Dutch government I learned there have been legal disputes going on for years about what even constitutes "telemetry". That was a decade ago, and even then there was push to move away from Microsoft in the government. Toward open source, or even Oracle. I suppose that with the Dutc…

When I think of Teams, I don’t think of solid, well supported software.

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#148

Post by johannes1234321 »

whatever1 wrote: post #102
vincvinc wrote: post #52

Related: "IMPOSING SANCTIONS ON THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT" (white house, feb 2025) https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/impo... Microsoft admits in French court it can't keep EU data safe from US authorities (jul 2025) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45822902

I don’t understand why this is the case though. Could MS create a new EU based company in which it just owns shares ? Or is the US cloud act so wide that they can demand data from all the companies a us based company has equity in?

There are attempts to lösen the control from the U.S. side like a cooperation between Microsoft/Azure and SAP or Google and T-Systems (deutsche Telekom) where the German side would run an "air gapped" region of those cloud stacks.

However I believe the rates in the end were too high to win notable contracts, but I haven't followed along in a while.

https://www.heise.de/news/Digitale-Souveraenitaet-Microsoft-...

https://t3n.de/news/t-systems-sovereign-cloud-google-verwalt...

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#149

Post by [deleted] »

XorNot wrote: post #112
shiandow wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be surprised if this isn't already the case. The extent to which you can do business in the EU without legal presence is limited. It is not a huge amount of protection though. I mean we've already established that selling to 'terrorists' can be sanctioned even when selling through an intermediary. So what's stopping the US from ordering Microsoft to stop selling licenses to the ICC? And then we've not touched on…

It's not about having a subsidiary, it's about the technical structure of 365 meaning Microsoft US has access to Microsoft EU servers and thus US employees can be compelled to follow US court orders. They simply don't separate the infrastructure this way AFAIK.

[deleted]

Re: ICC ditches Microsoft 365 for openDesk

#150

Post by Waterluvian »

shreddit wrote: post #141
pureagave wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most of my life I also used to think there was a difference between the two. But now I realized they are actually just the same.

They couldn’t be more different. One is doing it in secrecy and for a “reason”, to spy on someone. The other one will do it in public because he can and doesn’t like your name.

Which of these is meant to represent the current regime in power in the U.S.?
Post reply on HN