Two counters:

1. I'm not sure China caught up so quickly due to any lack of nationalism.

2. There's an allure to working with an EU business because it's in the EU because they're less likely to jerk you around. You have no idea how many times I get told their in nothing they can do, then have to drop the 'I live in the EU and this is illegal' card, and magically the problem is resolved by the next email.

> Using a European solution just because it’s European sounds wrong to me.

That depends who you are, and what you are doing. If you have information stored such that having it in US infrastructure is a national security risk, then you might think differently.

>but governments should copy some of the reasons the breeding grounds in the US and China exist.

Which reasons should they copy? Massive government subsidies? Large grants masquerading as defence contracts? Threatening foreign governments to force market access with taxation lower than the native businesses? Are you saying European governments should favour European companies just because they are European?

Europe isn't a nation.

And the whole point here is a more diverse alternative to the extreme dependency on the US tech companies

>Building a market reserved for mediocre tech solutions sounds like the wrong way to make Europe more independent.

The traction which is proverbial "wind in the sails" for further development must come from somewhere. A new promotional channel might help with it.

Also I don't think it's any kind on nationalism. Just pragmatism for the very unstable times.

I think the depths of the answers here, particularly with China, are far beyond the scope of technical discussion and to be honest likely beyond the scope of European-specific tech needs. Just because the US did one thing a certain way, and China did it another way; doesn't mean Europe must follow either of those to be successful.

However, it is going to require public funds to achieve. A public/private partnership scenario is very likely at least the near to mid term future for European tech development. And the world can only stand to benefit.

Politically, nationalism is absolutely very bad and it's a shame the world is headed in this direction. This global distrust only serves chaos agents and accelerates us into another World War (if we aren't already in the early stages of one). I had hope that people would prefer to come together but it's unfortunately too risky with US politics.

> and especially how China caught up so fast.

Isn't that largely nationalism and pressuring companies to use (initially) mediocre local tech solutions though? Once the market is there, quality catches up rapidly.

> especially how China caught up so fast.

Nationalism, but armed with actual law enforcement and economical support instead of good intentions and lip service.

> There are other reasons why Europe isn’t attractive for bringing these kinds of technologies to life, and investor money is only a small part of it.

And what are these other reasons?

Creating mediocre alternatives sometimes pave the way for real alternatives as you create a talent pool.

China is an example, countries that had become technology independent through sanctions is another

> Building a market reserved for mediocre tech solutions sounds like the wrong way to make Europe more independent.

You can’t foster excellence if you don’t reward it monetarily (enough).

No unified capital markets, no high reward as an investor.

As an employer/employee takes a year to fire people even when they don’t show up, ergo the incentive is to coast.

As a founder you’re buried in bureaucracy and taxes, so the incentive is to stay an employee.

It’s a trifecta of shit.