beloch
3 hours ago
If a politically stable nation with a good international reputation were to guarantee government respect for data privacy for data centres housed on its soil and run by its companies, that nation could become the Swiss bankers of data.
Rolling your own "digital sovereignty" is not going to be cheap for most nations, and many other nations simply won't be trusted by anyone, least of all their own citizens.
It's a bit flabbergasting that U.S. tech companies didn't see this coming years ago and lobby hard for the U.S. to repeal anti-privacy legislation like the CLOUD act. Their lunch is sitting out in the open, completely unwatched, waiting to be eaten by somebody else and it's far too late to do anything about it.
AnthonyMouse
an hour ago
The more astonishing thing is that people regularly talk about this in the context of hosting providers when by far the more significant threat is mobile platforms.
There are a zillion hosting companies, many of them outside the US. Now which mobile platform are you going to use that doesn't give one of two US companies root on your population's phones?
aembleton
8 minutes ago
> Now which mobile platform are you going to use that doesn't give one of two US companies root on your population's phones?
HarmonyOS
noir_lord
an hour ago
I have a sliding scale of devices I trust more or less (I trust nothing completely).
At the top of the trust scale is a self built desktop running fedora then way further down is my apple devices (iPads) and then even further down is my android phone.
Open source on hardware you control is the least worst option but since the hardware comes from abroad/countries I don’t trust much (including the US) not perfect.
EdiX
5 minutes ago
Soon thanks to Digital ID all your important business will have to go through the devices you trust the least.
kubb
2 hours ago
You could take your analogy further, and consider why the Swiss banking isn’t so opaque anymore. Hint: people who did really inhuman things used that system to store their profits, and the Swiss society, developed and stable as it is, decided that they don’t want to bear the moral cost of it anymore.
remus
2 hours ago
> ...decided that they don’t want to bear the moral cost of it anymore.
And of course the external pressure to loosen banking secrecy laws has been huge, particularly from the US e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBS_tax_evasion_controversies
embedding-shape
2 hours ago
But ultimately the Swiss decides what Switzerland does, and the population deciding they didn't want that, was the deciding factor. Been pressure on Switzerland about that for a long time, from many countries, and in fact still there is, as many still think they're not doing enough. Not everything in the world happens because of the US :)
rich_sasha
an hour ago
The US department requests that all foreign financial institutions share all their US clients details.
Wanna refuse? No problem. Of course you can. You're outside the US jurisdiction.
But every USD transaction you do is subject to, IIRC, 30% tax. Unless the US decides to block it altogether.
throwwwll
an hour ago
You are naiive and/or stupid. And/or gaslighting. Most likely the latter since you have to sugarcoat your message with trailing emoji.
UBS tried to hold for as long as they could, and the choice the US given them is "pay a fine (accrues daily) or be cut from world financial system run by dollar".
UBS ultimately paid a 780 million fine. The rest of Swiss banks followed suit immediately.
Many things in the world happen, and most of the dumb bullshit that happens is imposed by US. This naiivete has to stop, the times have changed, and you, you spefically are part of the problem.
beloch
2 hours ago
The Swiss didn't vet their clients. If Vladimir Putin wants to contract a data centre on your soil for the privacy, you can always have regulations that say, "No.".
AnthonyMouse
an hour ago
The entire premise of "other countries can trust your companies to protect their privacy" is that you can't. "US reads Dutch emails" is the thing you have to not do.
dmurray
an hour ago
You can be strict about who you do business with while still respecting their privacy once they are set up.
The respectable, politically popular country setting this up would simply say yes to the International Criminal Court, but no to Putin.
This doesn't work well as a blacklist of "everyone's allowed unless they turn out to be sanctioned", because some shell company or reseller could register and actually be a front for Russia or whatever other bogeyman. But just serving enormous respectable organisations is a big niche in itself.
AnthonyMouse
18 minutes ago
But now you're proposing something that doesn't solve the problem for the vast majority of people, since nearly everyone is neither the International Criminal Court nor Vladimir Putin.
petre
an hour ago
If the payments go through SWIFT, the problem is solved if either party is sanctioned.
throwwwll
an hour ago
> Swiss society decided
Nice attempt at whitewashing and gaslighting, but the only entity here that decided that is the fucking US of A.
lII1lIlI11ll
2 hours ago
It is not as simple as banking - people tend to want low-latency and high-speed connection which necessitate the data center to be in close proximity. Which basically means that founding a country with strong data protection laws somewhere in Antarctic won't get you many clients in Europe.
vitalyan1234
an hour ago
that's a psyop from the cloud evangelism era. a few hundred milliseconds of latency makes fuck all any difference for 95% of things, even voice/video calls.
lII1lIlI11ll
an hour ago
That is just like, your opinion, man? I personally find it a very poor experience talking to someone over high latency connection when we tend to always start talking over each other.
valzam
an hour ago
The question is, is that really only due to data center geo? I am always amazed how low latency and high quality Facetime between Europe <-> Australia is. Seems like good engineering can overcome less optimal geographics.
lII1lIlI11ll
an hour ago
I find that hard to believe. Are you implying that Apple is running their own fiber network providing low-latency connection between Europe and Australia? Or what kind of "good engineering"?
AnthonyMouse
an hour ago
If the premise is that you want to host data for people in Europe who don't want it to be under the control of the US then Frankfurt is a lower latency place to be than Virginia anyway.
lII1lIlI11ll
an hour ago
OP had a much stronger premise ("guarantee government respect for data privacy for data centres housed on its soil") than what you described.
Chris2048
an hour ago
> people tend to want low-latency and high-speed
that might change is privacy is an option. The real problem is the cost of building in the middle of nowhere, even if you use spare Starlink capacity, where do you get power & personnel from?
lII1lIlI11ll
an hour ago
> where do you get power
Wind, hydro, sun? This is 2026 after all.
> personnel
Depends on what that theoretical country would offer. Some kind of strong constitutionally-enshrined protections for privacy and perhaps from tyranny-of-the-majority exploiting upper-middle class like all other western countries and with strong IT jobs market? Are you kidding, sign me up!
Chris2048
an hour ago
The original post was "somewhere in Antarctic", what does that offer?
lII1lIlI11ll
38 minutes ago
I chose Antarctic as an example because it is one of few places on Earth with significant uninhabited land where one could theoretically establish a new sovereign state. Are you implying that all popular green energy technologies are somehow unfeasible there?
Chris2048
32 minutes ago
Yes, the "somehow" is that no one want to live there, and the associated expense of building there probably outweighs the benefits. I'm also sceptical you could establish a new sovereign state there.
hinata08
21 minutes ago
> Rolling your own "digital sovereignty" is not going to be cheap for most nations
neither are Microsoft 365 subscriptions at governmental scales
No offence, but I do believe a few Dutch ppl could run email servers for cheaper