Bilingual

Cloud Overview - Bert Hubert's writings
a day ago
- Europe's digital dependency on US cloud providers is a sovereignty risk, as US law allows access to data and potential sanctions could disrupt critical services.
- European governments are ill-equipped to lead cloud independence, but financial regulators might force banks to diversify, creating a path for others.
- The cloud consists of varied services; Europe excels at low-level infrastructure (servers, storage) but lacks competitive high-level SaaS alternatives to US hyperscalers.
- GAIA-X and other initiatives have not solved the problem; more specific industrial policy and incentives are needed to build a European cloud ecosystem.
- Open source alone is insufficient; it requires robust IT operations and better productization to compete with US big tech.
- US cloud dominance threatens European privacy and security, especially under the Trump administration, which may exploit dependency for leverage.
- A coherent strategy includes building 'European Cloud Modules' and backup communication systems for critical services like government and healthcare.
The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies
a month ago
- The US government has deployed $23.9 billion in direct equity investments across 26 companies, with a remaining legal capacity of $181 billion up to a $205 billion ceiling.
- Key sectors invested include critical minerals (e.g., MP Materials, 15% stake), semiconductors (e.g., Intel, 9.9% stake; xLight), quantum computing (9 companies), munitions (L3Harris), nuclear energy (Westinghouse), and steel (U.S. Steel golden share).
- The government uses a three-tool approach: direct equity (shareholder stakes), grants/loans (traditional support), and off-take agreements/price floors (guaranteed purchases, as with MP Materials).
- Private co-investors like J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs have contributed an additional $4.75 billion, with foreign partners such as Abu Dhabi's ADQ also participating.
- Next-wave sectors targeted for future investment include robotics/advanced manufacturing, drones/autonomous systems, shipbuilding, and critical minerals expansion, with robotics highlighted as a front-running opportunity.
- The program operates like a sovereign wealth fund, combining equity, grants, and purchase guarantees to create national champions and ensure commercial success.
Why jet engines aren't made in China
a month ago
- Jet engines are a complex manufacturing challenge where China's state-capitalist model struggles due to slow iteration cycles, high regulatory barriers, and the need for deep process knowledge accumulated over decades.
- China excels in industries with fast iteration cycles, clear technological targets, and underserved demand (e.g., EVs, batteries), but jet engines lack these features, relying instead on reliability, certification, and a specialized supplier network.
- The commercial jet engine market has thin margins, extreme cost sensitivity, and rigorous certification (e.g., FAA/EASA), making entry difficult; China's CJ-1000A program faces delays and limited domestic sales without international certification.
- Military jet engines are more feasible for China due to captive demand and lower efficiency requirements, but they still lag Western counterparts by decades in performance and reliability.
- China's pursuit of jet engine indigenization is driven by strategic autonomy (autarky) and civil-military fusion, despite high costs and opportunity costs, as it ignores market feedback in favor of ideological goals.
- The West's decentralized capital allows asymmetric bets on innovations like supersonic jets and autonomous drones, while China focuses on scaling mature technologies, raising questions about long-term innovation competitiveness.

industrial policy

Cloud Overview - Bert Hubert's writings

The US Government Is Now a Shareholder in 26 Companies

Why jet engines aren't made in China