Speaking of the EU
I see that Meta are begging the UK to retain EU law. As are 999 other companies that aren't headline news.
French cloud operator OVHcloud has been granted dedicated funding for its expansion by the European Investment Bank (EIB), comprising a €200 million ($208 million) credit facility to help it open new datacenters. According to the EIB, which describes itself as the "lending arm of the European Union," the €200 million credit …
> GDPR is a pain but two different GDPRs are even worse.
Well the (EU) GDPR and UK GDPR are *currently* not that different at all (beyond necessary minor changes).
Basically the UK GDPR was created effectively by doing a search-and-replace on the (EU) GDPR to change all references to EU bodies with their UK equivalents. The Keeling Schedule for the UK GDPR is available online which shows *exactly* what the changes were.
A minor difference/additional wrinkle is that organisations outside the UK who process the data of individuals inside the UK but don't have a presence in the UK must appoint a representative in the UK - in the same way as with the existing (EU) GDPR if they are outside the EU (no presence) they must appoint a reprehensive in the EU. That additional requirement is just an obvious consequence of Brexit.
However I'd guess there are probably quite a few USA companies out there who have a EU representative appointed but have no UK representative yet.
Of course assuming the UK GDPR diverges greatly from the (EU) GDPR then yes, in the future, having two substantially differing GDPRs to comply with could be a pain, but then the same applies with having to comply with other Data Protection laws in non EU/UK countries.
The digital bales of hay on the road. Give us some money. Or we will block les grandes routes a l'internet.
I understand the desire (even the need) for digital sovereignty and autonomy. But it seems that European companies cannot compete without a handout in one form or another from the tax payers. I wonder how the other EU countries feel about (yet again) funding inefficient French companies.
Why do you write rubbish like that.
The EIB is a bank, an investment bank. Banks lend money to customers.
Regarding inefficient companies I have absolutely no reason to believe the French are worse than the British, non at all.
And if you are worried about "tax payers" money I suggest you support efforts finding out where billions ended up with your sorry PPE adventure.
"The European Investment Bank (EIB) is the European Union's investment bank and is owned by the EU Member States. It is one of the largest supranational lenders in the world. The EIB finances and invests both through equity and debt solutions projects that achieve the policy aims of the European Union through loans, guarantees and technical assistance.".
"Since its inception in 1958 the EIB has invested over one trillion euros."
Britain used to own part of the bank too.
You are correct, the EIB is a bank, but…..
The EIB is underwritten by the member states. It’s written into the treaty, that if the EIB makes a loss, due to lending defaults, then the member states need to make it whole again, in proportion to GDP. That money wouldn’t come from EU subscriptions, it’s additional and separate liability.
The liability is *unlimited*. Many of the loans the EIB writes, are not “traditional commercial” loans. They include elements of taking ownership of assets, whereby in case of problems the EIB participates in both rights *and responsibilities* of the underlying asset. For example, there are infrastructure projects, that the EIB has “only” loaned a couple hundred million euros on, but this has carried with it liabilities of large multiples of that, in case the project fails.
An excellent example is what’s going on in Ukraine. One of out of dozens of projects the EIB financed there, pre-2022, they “only” loaned the Kyiv City Urban Electric Transport $100M. However, the EIB is now *financially liable” for the provision of Urban Electric Transport to Kyiv, and rebuilding it to initial plans. Unlimited, independent of how damaged Kyiv is by Russian rockets. Apparently, being at the sharp end of near-nuclear war wasn’t in the EIB risk register when they wrote the loan contract.
I can’t guess any more than you can, what it is going to cost to build an entire city electric public transport system, from scratch, in a city that may well have no running water, no electricity, and no streets by the time it comes to build it. But I think we can be fairly sure that will be tens of billions, on its own, and the EU member state taxpayers are fully on the hook for it. That’s one project, amongst thousands that the EIB has underwritten.
I’m sure you are going to say “I want to support Ukraine”. Fine. But these aren’t commercial loans in the sense normally meant. There are similar loan disasters waiting to come to light in Haiti, South Africa, much of sub-Saharan Africa, etc, etc. The EU Member States are on the hook for many, many trillions, possibly ten trillion or even more. Just how much is totally unquantified.
Oh yes, and one more thing. Not just did the U.K. *used* to own part of the EIB. Post-Brexit, it *still does* own both assets and liabilities in run-off, proportionate to our share, for loans that were written while we were part of it.
So, as the Ukraine debacle becomes financially apparent over the next couple years, the U.K. absolutely will have to pay many billions for our EIB liabilities. But less than half what we would have done, had we remained in today. And a lot, lot more than had we managed to walk away in 2016.
But it was a key part in my decision-making for the referendum, and that of millions of others, in full knowledge of these off-balance-sheet liabilities of the EU, that we just *had* to get away ASAP, whatever the immediate cost of the “divorce bill”. Whichever countries are left in, are left holding the financial baby.
Sorry Germany, sorry France, sorry Finland, but you’re all adults, it’s your responsibility to read the Ts and Cs, and balance sheet. If you ignore what it tells you, that’s on you.
Well, I understand the details of EIB contracts and finances well enough, to have made a total high-seven-figure profit out of leveraged investments against it. Consistently, for nigh on two decades. Some of that expertise has been gained by reading thousands of pages of documentation and contracts, and some of it by taking advice from top-flight City lawyers at £1500 per hour.
You, on the other hand, have read the Wikipedia article.
But apparently it’s me who is ignorant.
IMO, the method of decreasing interest rates, tax breaks on general capital gains, or lowering collateral requirements for hedge funds and banks is far too overused, and end up creating speculation bubbles with money running into dead ends like crypto and other non productive nonsense - while too little of that stimulus is available for infrastructure because nonsense speculation provides the fastest returns.
But you're not absolutely wrong, just relatively unrealistic.
It's good these are loans and not pure handouts.
-> It's good these are loans and not pure handouts.
If they are loans, then yes. But it depends on the terms if they are considered genuine loans or are in fact just subsidies dressed up as loans. If they are being offered at below base rate (whatever that is in the EU), then the terms are not strictly commercial.
You don't seem to get it do you.
Why do you think EU countries create a not for profit bank if not to make it more favourable to get loans for EU companies.
And as the Wiki text says "It primarily funds projects that "cannot be entirely financed by the various means available in the individual Member States".
And banking always includes risk taking.
Have you adopted the f**k business thinking by Boris too
-> And as the Wiki text says "It primarily funds projects that "cannot be entirely financed by the various means available in the individual Member States".
Which means, as I wrote above, this is about inefficient companies who are unable to run without subsidies. France is a big country with many banks. But OVH can't get a commercial loan because their business case is not worth 2 eurocents. So out come the subsidies.
Your thinking is illogical.
“Getting a loan” isn’t in itself a benefit to somebody. It’s only a benefit, if the business case is valid, including risk.
If the business case is valid, ie the risk-reward is such that it is likely the investment will be successful, and also return both profit to the company receiving the loan *and* interest to the bank…..then *any* bank will make the loan. The business of a bank is to make interest, which they can only do by making loans.
So if that isn’t happening on the open market, it suggests that highly skilled financial people, with decades of experience in the field, think it’s going to *fail*. In that case, giving the loan anyway, isn’t *helping* the company. It’s saddling them with debt they are never going to be able to repay.
You see the same with rich kids getting a “loan” from the Bank of Mum and Dad to “start their own business”. I always tell them “No, don’t do that. Write yourself a proper business case, and take it to the business adviser of your bank. Listen to what they tell you about it’s viability, research your options, and fix what can be fixed.”
They don’t listen of course. And soon enough, they have no business and no inheritance either.
I had to look this up:
"The adiabatic lapse rate is the rate at which the temperature of an air parcel changes in response to the compression or expansion associated with elevation change, under the assumption that the process is adiabatic, i.e., no heat exchange occurs between the given air parcel and its surroundings."
So basically OVH wants to provide some sort of expansion cooling mechanism to prevent a repetition of their earlier transfer of data in 'the cloud' to data in 'a cloud' (of smoke). Maybe just not stacking lots of power hungry equipment on top of each other would help.
Searching "adiabatic cooling" gives a lot of good hits.
evapco dot com adiabatic-cooling-101
Adiabatic cooling systems function similarly to dry cooling systems, but with the incorporation of pre-cooling pads; running water over pre-cooling pads and drawing air through the pads depresses the ambient dry bulb of the incoming air. The depressed dry bulb allows for greater system heat rejection. The result of this is that adiabatic systems are highly effective in hot, dry environments, while using less water than traditional evaporative units. Adiabatic units also deliver the required cooling capacity in a smaller footprint and/or lower fan motor horsepower than a completely dry cooler/condenser.
Please post if you can explain "depressed dry bulb" in layman terms.
Psychrometer. We had one in 9th grade science here in the States. It's a method of measuring relative humidity by comparing the difference in temperature between a thermometer with a wet "sock" on it's bulb and a thermometer without said sock after whirling the hell ("like a psycho!") out of a shaft containing the thermometers connected to an axle. If the air is dry, the water in the sock evaporates and cools it's thermometer. The greater the cooling, the drier the air and vice versa.
That's the dry bulb bit. And I think they mean that they are cooling the air, but being transparent that they are doing so by increasing the relative humidity.
And then I guess the idea here is that humid air carries away more heat than dry air?
> Please post if you can explain "depressed dry bulb" in layman terms.
A similar technique: one hot day, there was a puddle alongside our mini-mart. Investigating, I found a lawn sprinkler spraying up into the air conditioning's outside coils. This is marginal in the East US damp clime, but I assume the A/C was on a last leg and they were trying to get through the one hot week while waiting for repairs.
Evaporation of water was the core of Carrier's pre-Freon(r) air conditioning. Jerking the temperature and humidity around with wet pads and steam re-heat. Yes, the Ancients stole our inventions.
I assume that you know that Daft Punk is a French band?
Apparently so named after an earlier incarnation was described in the UK music press as "some French daft punk band". To be fair, quite a lot of French punk is pretty daft.
quite a lot of French punk is pretty daft.
Parabellum, Ludwig von 88, Les Sheriff, Berurier Noir for the old bands are legend.
For the current scene, there are plenty of interesting bands to discover for the ones who listen to Punk, like Punish Yourself, Brassens not dead or Opium du Peuple
== Bring us Dabbsy back! ==