I recently talked with a guy who builds software for small & medium sized German insurance firms and he says almost all of their clients are working on removing US services from their tech stack due to perceiving them as highly risky. This includes cloud services, office tools, AI tools, etc. So far he said the switch is a mixed bag with some successes and some blunders, but the push is very clear.

Highly anecdotal stuff, but maybe this cut is deeper than I expected.

@Techaltar my firm literally changed my job to be migrating AWS infrastructure to EU alternatives. long term project since so much is AWS tech debt, but we who have been screaming from the rooftops for more than a decade about relying on USA infrastructure are now richly vindicated. the motivation is 100% taking all data safely away from the Amis, and the upper echelons are very serious about it—more than the fascism of the Trump administration, its flirting with Putinism is seen as a threat.

of course, they still want to run software in someone's "cloud" rather than getting us some goddamn servers, but hey if the "cloud" is not owned by billionaires from surveillance-land that's a bit less bad.

@jered @Techaltar You need at a minimum CPUs that aren't potentially backdoored by the NSA. Some reading on the history of the Intel Management Engine firmare might be relevant. (Hint: it's baked into high end Intel processors, handles bus i/o transactions, and runs atop a Minix implementation, i.e. a full-blown POSIX-compatible microkernel OS.)

Sane British IT policy would start by banning Intel processors and maybe nationalizing ARM.

@Techaltar Can confirm that here in France there are similar sentiments. People have been yapping about digital sovereignty for a decade with little to no progress, but since the beginning of the year, I’ve seen lots of significant projects. Mostly in the public sector, oriented towards self-hosting primarily.

The straws that have broken are constant price upgrades to O365, Windows 11 hardware requirements and the disabling of the ICC prosecuter’s account.

@Techaltar As an American, I’d say divesting of services from US services is a good thing. We are witnessing an authoritarian takeover and it is moving very fast. Online services of any kind will be disrupted. Secondly, a trend like that will send a message to businesses here, and also give heart to the opposition to Trumpism. The GDPR is very good. Insist on compliance.
@Techaltar Nothing surprising here. The ECJ has ruled in Schrems II rather clearly that the US legal order is incompatible with the GDPR (and that is practically directly derived from EU primary law). For the time the EC and the politicians are re-enacting for the 3rd time Grimm's The Emporer's New Clothes. But the music can stop at any time, Noyb has already a complaint in national courts, it's only a question before the ECJ gets to voice their opinion yet again, and this

time they will probably make it clear that a pretend solution is incompatible with basic EU rights (their position demands that). Crystal clear, as in no matter what the EC pretends, the national courts will have their guidance to ignore the Commission. (And many MS constitutional courts made their acceptance of the EU/EU treaties conditional upon constitutional identity → the EC is ignoring EU basic rights at their own peril.)

And on the AI side, most US AI providers simply cannot even begin to fulfil the AI Act requirements when it comes to safety & transparency. Interestingly, Meta might be the only US AI provider that might, not by design, but by their own requirements of adjusting their moderation, has potentially the technical flexibility to adjust to the EU regulatory landscape.

Just consider ATS. The cool systems that most Fortune 500 companies use to screen CV before they even reach humans.

In the EU, this is a discrimination suit-wave waiting to happen:
GDPR disallows automatic decisions by computers that have significant effects on humans ✅
EU Act deepens the pit by giving the user the right for a clear and easily understood argumentation why they were rejected ✅ (Something that the classical US LLM with baked in "universal global rules" safety layers generally has problems to provide)
And now comes the coup de grâce, photos on CVs.

That's a totally MS-specific habit. In Austria, the saying goes that a good CV starts with a visit with a professional photographer. In Belgium it's frowned upon strongly.
Rejecting a CV because it has a photo or does not, especially when it comes from an EU citizen from a different EU MS, that might have different cultural standards, doesn't that sound like indirect discrimination by nationality? Something that the EU institutions strongly frown upon.

So yes, there is a huge, let's call it "legal enforcement debt" in the EU (similar to technical debt if you want so), concerning our American friends.

And with #Trump emphasizing that the USA is not really an ally, but becoming more hostile by the day, it's rather obvious that this moratorium on enforcing EU laws against US corporations (and their EU customers) might stop at any time.

@Techaltar it makes sense. On a very small scale my business is doing.

Maybe each service on their own is fine. But they have all shown subservient attitudes. If the powers want access to data, it will be given. If the government decide to tariff or pull long standing arrangements they will. It's not a stretch that we could wake up one day with no access to large amounts of our data.

That's without looking at diverging values; gone are US promises of equality, diversity, no sustainability...