The title rubs me the wrong way. “Private alternatives” implies the US tech isn’t privately owned.

Right, I was too vague too. See my other comment please.

I’m sure some people are perfectly okay with the bottom part and would consider it a great justification for the top part. That’s what I meant.

At first I thought I agree with the post and now I’m second-guessing what OP is trying to convey. This is an amazingly ambiguous picture when posted without further commentary.

As a non-native English speaker, I still have no idea why this specific phrase is so significant and at this point I’m afraid to ask.