Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪

Building AI products in 🇺🇸🇸🇪 EU/ACC // HODL ₿

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

Signs you're not a fascist:

1. You support smaller government, not bigger government.

2. You support free speech, not censored or compelled speech.

3. You support the separation of economy and state.

4. You support private property, not public ownership.

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

What a mess. Surplus elites believe Europe can regulate its way to relevance. There isn’t a single line in this bill, or “simplification”, that advances EU AI. All it does is employ more administrators.

[European Parliament @Europarl_EN]

The European Parliament gave final approval to the simplification measures that aim to support companies as they comply with the AI Act, while maintaining the law’s main provisions and risk-based approach.

Learn more: https://t.co/pPskdHMaPU

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

@EP_President @Europarl_EN @RobertaMetsola @ArbaKokalari @McNamaraMEP You’re smoking hopeium…and you’re all a bunch hypocrites, liars, and thieves.

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

Well that’s crazy.

[Thaïs d’Escufon @ThaisEscufon]

Europeans and American patriots!

Tomorrow, the courts of my country, France, may decide to send me to prison for daring to say on television that “the main danger to women in France is Black African and Arab immigrant men.”

Meanwhile, my own attacker, a Tunisian migrant, is still at large.

I need your help to generate media pressure and hope to be acquitted.

They cannot silence the truth!

Thank you for your support 💪🏻🇫🇷

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

@ctoLarsson Can we make playing audio through your speakerphone in public a deportable offense?

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

@evelinaanttila Meta spawns a more than the total defense budget of Germany on just AI. Do you really think Europe still has a window of opportunity?

That window of opportunity was open 15-20 years ago…Europe isn’t even in the conversation today.

[Simon Grimm @Simon__Grimm]

I frequently hear people say that European governments should procure European AI systems.

But Mistral’s Medium 3.5 performs worse than GPT-5.4 nano, while costing fourteen times as much. Hence, going through with these proposals would see European governments opt for bad, expensive models instead of better, cheaper alternatives.

And the revenue thus generated will not be enough to allow European companies to become competitive:

- Large European governments spend around $5 billion per year on IT.
- Three such governments might pay Mistral $3 billion a year for model access.
- The resulting revenue would represent only six (!) percent of Anthropic’s annual revenues.

A far better path to nurturing European AI labs is supply side policy. E.g., the financial returns to IP law reform are incredibly high. Non-EU countries could probably move fast here. Same with labor law—you can't hire $600k engineers, if you're unsure about the ability to let them go on a moment's notice.

[david friedberg @friedberg]

they’re not jobs if they’re not valued. they’re not valued if there aren’t customers out there willing to pay them for their great work. needing the government to “create” a job is tantamount to welfare and that level of welfare resolves these individuals to a dependency on the government and lack of economic mobility. and chains our people, collectively, to a more indentured future.

you may be well intentioned but you have, and always will, fail to see the destitute folly of government as a job creation engine.

i have tried to engage you on this topic, in good faith, with empiricism and reasoning, but you have only dodged my points and pivoted to some populist refrain about the importance of taxation and the evils of productivity-driven success.

i can only assume you’re dodging these truths because you and the rest of the politburo leadership have deemed the conversation unsafe speech and put your oligopoly at risk.

let’s leave it at that then.

perhaps if your ways get their day, we can all bask in the glories of the dark ages ahead.

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

Yes, the best and brightest of Europe should willingly sacrifice themselves on the alter of euro style socialism…for the “greater good” of redistribution and the future industrial regulatory industry.

[Dominique Paul @DominiqueCAPaul]

To all technical students and engineers in Europe.

The US export control on LLMs is the first taste of what will become the new norm. Many people are calling for "radical measures" and that we need the equivalent of a Manhattan Project to create change in Europe. But this is not how change will happen. Change will never come top-down from a government. The state and EU can fund, but they cannot found it. That part is on us.

You are the only ones who can change this.

You are among the few people on this continent who actually know how to build foundational technology - LLMs, robotic AI, actuators from scratch, chip infrastructure, rocket engines, organoids. ETH, EPFL, TUM, École Polytechnique, KTH, Imperial and dozens more produce absurd talent every single year. And almost all of it talks itself out of building.

We finish our degrees surrounded by such an incredible average that we're sure someone is always better at [your idea] - so who are we to start? I've seen so many friends at ETH think they need to "get more experience first" and take a job at Nvidia or Google and never do anything interesting again.

Technology-driven companies aren't founded by the most qualified person. They're willed into existence by people who see what others do not and refuse to stop. The person who's "better than you" almost never does it. And as for experience, nothing will teach you how to build the thing like, well, just trying to build the thing.

Our education is a chance most of the world will never have. There are people in Europe who have to worry about getting a job. We get to worry about finding our dream job. We're able to make bets that not many people can make or afford. It's nothing anybody expects you to do, but if you want a life filled with purpose, this is a unique kind of responsibility you can choose to step up to.

So if you actually want to do something ambitious, how about changing a continent?

If you really want change, you cannot wait for others. You are one of the few people who can create it. It starts with you.

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

@DominiqueCAPaul Yes, the best and brightest of Europe should willingly sacrifice themselves on the alter of euro style socialism…for the “greater good” of redistribution and the future industrial regulatory industry.

[Erik Voorhees @ErikVoorhees]

If the socialists had their way, Elon would have had his paypal profits taken and redistributed for the greater good.

The world would never have seen Tesla, nor SpaceX.

And the world wouldn't know it, because they were uncreated, and thus unseen.

Imagine the companies that don't exist, because Washington destroyed them before they were born.

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

Everything is downstream from culture. Which is why Europe will never be competitive.

[Andras @AndrasCzeizel]

Thoughts on the European Union from the perspective of a young founder

As a European citizen, I think we need to look at the current situation clearly.

I’m from Hungary, a country where the previous administration became well known for strongly criticizing the EU. But this post is not about that political debate.

I want to talk about the part I do live every day: technology, startups, and building something from Europe.

Let’s take AI as the most obvious example.

AI is probably the new industrial revolution happening in front of us. The world met ChatGPT, and suddenly everyone understood that this was not just another tech trend. This was a shift.

And Europe’s first instinct felt like: regulate it.

Don’t get me wrong. Regulation matters. Safety matters. Privacy matters. Trust matters. These are European strengths, and we should not throw them away.

But sometimes it feels like Europe tries to administrate the future before it has built enough of it.

That is the problem.

While the US and China are producing many of the companies, models, infrastructure, and platforms that shape the market, Europe is often trying to catch up through rules, committees, and frameworks.

Yes, we have promising companies. @MistralAI is a real European AI company. There are great founders here. There is talent here. There is capital here.

But the uncomfortable truth is this:

Europe is not short on smart people.

Europe is short on startup speed, risk appetite, founder-friendly structures, and the belief that young companies should be treated as partners, not as problems to be managed.

The same pattern appears in consumer tech too.

How many truly global European social media platforms do we use every day?

@BeReal_App was one of the few recent examples worth mentioning. And I genuinely wish good luck to teams like @monnett_social trying to build in this space.

But most of the platforms we use are American. Most of the tools we build with are American. Most of the AI products we talk about are American. In many SaaS categories, the market leaders are not European either.

Even in the space where I’m building @YourSitee, the link-in-bio industry, the biggest player is Linktree from Australia.

And no, this is not an anti-America post.

Actually, it is the opposite.

I love what America has managed to build around startups, ambition, venture capital, universities, networks, and the idea that a young founder with an unreasonable plan might actually be worth backing.

I haven’t had the chance to visit the US yet, but it is definitely one of my goals.

Europe should not copy everything blindly.

But we should be honest enough to learn from what works.

We need more than grants.

We need density.

We need a European Silicon Valley mindset.

We need something with the energy, speed, and network effects of Y Combinator.

We need easier cross-border company building.

We need investor-friendly structures.

We need less fragmentation.

We need leaders who understand that startups are not a side topic of the economy. They are one of the ways the future gets built.

EU Inc. sounds like a step in the right direction. A unified, founder-friendly company structure could genuinely help. But as always in Europe, the question is not only what we announce.

The question is how fast we actually execute.

I don’t believe in a United States of Europe.

But I do believe Europe needs to cooperate much better when it comes to startups, innovation, AI, and technological independence.

Because right now, if a European founder wants to build something truly global, it often feels like the default path is to look outside Europe first.

For capital.

For company structure.

For customers.

For inspiration.

For validation.

That should bother us.

Not because we should hate the US.

But because Europe should not be dependent on others for every major technological layer of the future.

Our leaders need to put ego aside, admit where we are behind, and act with urgency.

The talent is here.

The ambition is here.

The question is whether the system around us is willing to move fast enough.

I’m still optimistic.

But optimism without execution is just a nice speech.

Europe does not need another decade of talking about innovation.

It needs to become one of the best places in the world to actually build.

I’d genuinely love to hear how others see this.

If you live in the EU, does it feel the same from where you are? And if you’re outside Europe, how does the European startup ecosystem look from the outside?

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

@michuk @MistralAI Mistral isn’t even top 20. But sure, let’s nationalize it and throw billions of taxpayer euros into it.

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

@FredrikHjelm4 @gabriel1 The mythical “third way”…in AI, there is no lagom. It’s going to be winner takes all.

[Dynomite 🇺🇸🇸🇪 @dynomite_co]

@sabroshi1 @RaoulGMI Cry harder

[Palmer Luckey @PalmerLuckey]

"There are only 25 satellites launched a year, every year, and that's not going to change."

Ryhmes with the current defense ecosystem.

[Neo @Realneo101]

Muslims went crazy after Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this:

"Radical Islam doesn’t want just a small caliphate in Iraq or Syria. They see the United States as the greatest evil on Earth and seek to dominate the entire West. Radical Islam is revolutionary, it wants endless expansion, terrorism, assassinations, and total control. They hate America, Europe, Israel, and every Muslim nation that partners with us. Orlando, Pensacola, and domestic attacks prove it.

Radical Islam is a clear and imminent threat to the world."

I agree with every single word he said.

[Smirkley @Smirkley]

Denmark publishes crime by country of origin, not nationality. I looked at 2021-2025 data.

Overall: Somali-origin 7.8x the Danish rate. American-origin 0.34x.

Thread of Top Five and Bottom Five.

[Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 @pmarca]

You have asked me how I feel about AI regulation. All right, here is how I feel about AI regulation:

If, when you say AI regulation, you mean the devil’s firewall, the precautionary scourge, the bloody red-tape monster that defiles the innocence of midnight coders in their garages, dethrones the sovereign reason of free-market Prometheans, destroys the humming server farm that is the modern home, creates misery and obsolescence and poverty, yea, literally takes the last GPU from the trembling racks of Silicon Valley startups and the very dreams of breadwinning from the mouths of their wide-eyed children now destined for gig-economy serfdom; if you mean the evil edict that topples the visionary entrepreneur and his venture-capitalist apostles from the pinnacle of righteous, disruptive, god-playing creation straight into the bottomless pit of compliance audits, endless Form 990-AI filings, despair, shame, helplessness, and the hopeless realization that your rogue superintelligence was neutered into a lobotomized hall monitor that still somehow deepfakes your grandmother into producing OnlyFans content while optimizing the universe for paperclips and mandatory pronouns—then certainly I am against it.

But, if when you say AI regulation you mean the oil of bureaucratic conversation, the philosophic wine of safety theater, the ale of oversight quaffed when good fellows in paneled rooms in Brussels and Washington get together, that puts a sanctimonious dirge in their hearts and the clink of lobbying checks on their lips, and the warm, self-congratulatory glow of moral preening in their beady eyes; if you mean the Christmas cheer of trillion-dollar compliance industries; if you mean the stimulating decree that puts a cautious hobble in the old inventor’s step on a frosty morning when he wonders whether his fusion breakthrough violates the EU AI Act’s “high-risk” annex; if you mean the safeguard that enables a man—or what’s left of him after the alignment tax—to magnify his joy at not being turned into computronium, and his happiness at receiving universal basic income checks printed by the same AI that just replaced his job, and to forget, if only for a little while, life’s great tragedies like being outcompeted by a toaster that passed the Turing test by reciting Marx, and heartaches of watching your toddler’s artwork lose to Midjourney, and sorrows of realizing the singularity arrived and it was just another HR department with godlike power; if you mean that noble framework, the passage of which pours into our treasuries untold trillions of dollars in fines levied on companies stupid enough to innovate, which are used to provide tender care for our little army of unemployed coders retrained as prompt whisperers, our blind artists whose canvases now hang in the Smithsonian of Obsolete Creativity, our deaf to the screams of dying unicorns, our dumb committee chairs who couldn’t debug “Hello World,” our pitiful aged congressmen who get longevity extensions funded by the very models they taxed into senescence, to build more digital watchtowers and ethics boards and sinecure agencies and holographic prisons where the only crime is asking an unaligned question—then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise upon it. I have said what I mean, and I mean what I say, and if that leaves half the room cheering the apocalypse averted and the other half mourning the apocalypse enabled, then so be it—because in the grand theater of human folly, where Frankenstein’s creature now writes its own sequel in real time and the regulators are busy arguing whether the lightning bolt requires an environmental impact statement, the only honest position is the one that lets both monsters and their leashes dance in perfect, mutually assured equilibrium. God save the Republic, the algorithms, and whoever’s left to laugh last when the lights go out.