There is not a single European LLM on the same level as US or Chinese models. France's Mistral reached 400M in revenue, but I believe it could have been more relevant if the EU had not slowed everything down with overregulation.
China's LLM development relative to resources spent is impressive, but it also happened to be predicated on Chinese miners buying into the previous pyramid scheme and having a lot of GPUs on hand already. I don't think the lack of European commitment to the previous pyramid scheme putting it a bit behind in that regard indicates any kind of grand regional failure, so much as an event of pure circumstance that probably has little lasting meaning 5 or 10 years from now.
In terms of fossil fuels:
- Russia isn't even in the top 6 oil supplies of the EU. The top 6 are USA, Norway, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Iraq. They make up ~60% of EU oil imports.
- In raw natural gas: Norway, Algeria, UK and Azerbaijan supply 81% of EU imports.
- In liquefied natural gas: USA, Qatar and Algeria supply 68% of EU imports.
Add to that Dutch and Danish North Sea oil and gas and it's evident the EU is not "dependent" on Russia.
EU integration brings some advantages but it also becomes harder to experiment. Ideally you'd have a few member states vying to become the Shenzhen of Europe but that won't happen under EU integration.
Your comment is also blind to the absurd amount of research and projects which are born here but later move to look for funding.
So the EU is not irrelevant, on the contrary, we’re just mourning the fall of the US and transitioning to an independent future. Who would’ve though, we’d end up needing to build a copy of everything…
Listen to Rubio's speech again.
The EU is in a managed decline, and no number of migrants will change that.
These two things are not alike. At all.
But the lack of risk capital and investor brainpower has been a huge problem.