I absolutely appreciate and agree with the sentiment, but can't figure out what the proposition actually is. The thesis seems to be: "Here's a problem. We want to solve it." Aaaaaaaaaaaand ... that's it. Exactly how are you going to solve it? Or, if "exactly" is too much of an ask, could we at least have a "vaguely"? Seems like it needs more meat on the bones!
It says so on the tin. "Escape the chokehold of hyperscalers" is all that matters, really. Everything else will follow nicely from it. Compute density is so good these days, you don't even need major datacenter investment. There are modular DC designs that fit in a shipping container. You tow one around, connect power, fiber, cooling lines (to intercoolers in another shipping container) and that's it. You would be surprised how much can be accomplished with so very little. There are many advantages to this approach, like being able to bring up SCIF-equivalent inspectable spaces on the cheap, but considering we're all probably going to war sooner than later, it might as well become necessary. This is akin to how SAAB, and perhaps to a larger extent Ukraine, have changed airplane logistics.
Unless you're a hyperscaler yourself, hyperscaling is overrated.
Great, now how do you make that actually happen at a political / regulatory / cultural level?
It's already an uphill battle, because humans in large organisations seem to have an innately conservative bias which says that "nobody ever got fired for choosing ${giganticEvilStatusQuoCorporation}". That, combined with the fact that the US hyperscalars have, I dunno, hundreds of billions of dollars worth of ability to put their thumb on the political and regulatory scales, make this an uphill battle. There will need to be a specific plan for leveling the playing field.
I'm at a point in my life (personal bandwidth hovering near 0%) where I'm not getting involved in anything unless I have not just a good reason ("this is a noble agenda; somebody should do something about it, and hey, I guess I'm a somebody"), but a damned specific reason ("I have unique capabilities which can help this specific initiative in this specific way").
Anyhow, in this particular domain, I'm pretty sure there are people who could be MUCH more useful contributors than I. I'd love to forward the "manifesto" to them -- except I know that they're in the same position as me: essentially zero bandwidth. Any new project they get involved with means dropping something else that's currently on their plate, and is presumably important. They're not going to do that on a lark. They'll need need a damned good reason to participate, before deciding to spend time on something new.
To be honest, ANY real power-players will be in this position. They don't have free time on their hands; they won't just join up in the vague hope that maybe it'll be a place where things can happen. You will need power-players on-side, and without a much more specific proposition, you're not going to get them.
But I'm glad you've joined. Job no. 1: that manifesto needs to do a lot more manifesting before it's fit for purpose!
