← Back to context

Comment by regularfry

17 hours ago

Depends on the parameters of "acceptable", but they do offer inference in non-US zones. If the company is already on AWS for meaningful workloads with sensitive data (which is not uncommon), they've already been through the hard part.

That being said it's not quite as simple as would be ideal, you do need to check whether there's an additional EULA on your specific model choice.

Acceptable as in 'does not break the law'.

  • For data residency reasons? You can meet data residency requirements on AWS, I'm pretty sure. Mind sharing which condition blocked it in your experience? Mostly curious because in the US there isn't that much interest in on-prem deployments because it's easier to scale up and upgrade using the cloud and it's easier to use AWS because you don't have to run a new compliance process for each part of the stack.

    • You could until the Trump admin decided to (attempt to) overrule the deal that was in place (the DPF).

      The perceived lack of independence of the FTC is a major driver behind the exodus on this side of the Atlantic and it isn't just the smaller players that are moving. Airbus for instance.

      Now the datacenters supposedly operating under at-arms-length management are no longer sufficient for compliance.

      There are calls to repeal the whole thing with respect to the US.

      https://noyb.eu/en/us-supreme-court-just-blew-eu-us-data-tra...

      Yes, biased source and title, but the contents are pretty good.

      2 replies →