I built a directory of European AI providers because “EU-hosted” doesn’t tell you who runs the AI

If you are trying to buy European technology, choosing an AI service is surprisingly difficult.

Providers use terms such as “EU-hosted,” “European,” “sovereign,” and “GDPR-ready” as if they all mean the same thing. They don’t.

An AI service might:

• run its models directly on European infrastructure;
• store data in Europe but send prompts to another company for inference;
• contract through a European entity while being controlled elsewhere;
• provide European GPUs while the customer operates the models;
• advertise EU hosting without clearly documenting the runtime path.

All of these are different—not only legally, but technically. Where the server sits does not necessarily tell you who receives the request, who operates the model, or which jurisdiction controls the companies involved.

That is why I built EUAIAPI:

https://euhostedai.directory

It is a public directory for finding AI models and inference services available through European infrastructure. Instead of reducing everything to a “European” or “sovereign” badge, the goal is to separate:

• where inference is documented to run;
• who operates the runtime;
• whether requests are handled firsthand or routed elsewhere;
• the provider’s contracting entity and ownership;
• infrastructure and important subprocessors;
• the evidence supporting each conclusion.

The main catalogue focuses on providers that operate at least one customer-facing inference runtime firsthand in the EU, EEA or Switzerland. Pure gateways and resellers are treated separately. If a provider operates one model itself but routes many others, only the firsthand runtime should receive that classification.

Most importantly, Unknown is a legitimate result. If the public evidence does not establish where or by whom inference is performed, the directory should say so rather than display a reassuring green badge.

The site is currently in beta, and the dataset is still being audited. I would appreciate help from this community:

• Which European AI providers are missing?
• Which services claim European hosting but leave the runtime path unclear?
• What evidence matters most when you choose a European AI service?
• Should routers, GPU clouds and firsthand inference providers always be shown as separate categories?

Disclosure: this is my project. It is not a claim that every listed service is GDPR-compliant or fully sovereign. The purpose is to make the evidence and uncertainty visible so people can make their own decisions.

There are some great alternatives to GitHub in Europe right now:

- Codeberg (for open source only)

- Tangled (Finland, based on Atproto, for open source only)

- Rickub (private and paid repositories)

I personally use Rickub. It's in beta since this week and it's really promising.

I’ve realized that most of the artists I listen to are American, I want to branch out and maybe listen to some more EU based musicians. What are some recommendations?

Hello,

I am currently looking for some new coffees, I know only a very very small amount of coffee is produced within Europe and these producers mainly do for own use.
But there are a lot of roasters with a ethical and environmental approach, one that I like is the Swedish Lykke coffee company, but I am looking for similar companies. What is your go to cuppa?

Hey guys!
What online recruitment tools/platforms do you know that are based in the EU?
For example, eRecruiter- a Polish company.
All suggestions welcome.

Hello!

I am trying to degoogle but there is still one last thing I can't move from at this moment and it is Googke Photos. I am really used to UI and sharing photos with friends but there is one thing I am still missing.

Is there any alternative that allows me to add different tags to my pictures? For example I would like to tag one photo with tags 'family' AND 'vacation' and then search pictures with several tags?

Thank you for answers!

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/sep/06/eu-factory-job-cuts-china-colonises-supply-chains-industry-warns

just in case you looking to buy new sportswear

We’re going to market right now and deciding on how we want to invest our time for growing users. We have a couple thoughts/strategies, but we’d really love to EU-pill it. We’re a small startup based in Finland, with our primary competitor being US-centric.

We’re considering how we collaborate with creators. Is there any specific EU-based directories for collaborations? Any EU-based streaming services or platforms worth taking a look at?

Hi,

I also posted this over in r/boots but figured I'd try here as well!

I’m looking for recommendations for high-quality Derby boots available from EU-based retailers.

My ideal reference is the Crockett & Jones Argyll, but they’re outside my budget of €300 max. I’ve spotted a few alternatives like the Berwick 1707 Derby (cap-toe), but the rough leather finish isn’t appealing to me. The Old Mulla Tâmega is close, though perhaps a bit too utilitarian for my taste.

Are there other brands or models I might be overlooking? Or should I adjust my expectations to fit this budget?

Thanks!

I've been looking for new rain pants. I used to have some by Decathlon, but even 2 sizes above my normal size I find the legs too short. I don't mind spending more if they are:

• Suitable for people with longer legs
• Able to put on wiithout taking boots off
• Breathable (will want to ride bikes and hike in them)
• Non (or reduced use of) PFAS
• European (though Canadian would be ok)
• Not shipped 3x around the world if possible

I know Vaudé used to be pretty environmentally friendly, but I've never tried some so I don't know about length, and I don't know if they're still all EU based.

Munich public transportation authorities are testing autonomous on-demand vehicles in public traffic for the first time.

https://www.mvg.de/mvg/presse/pressemeldungen/2026-09-07-testbetrieb-autonome-fahrzeuge

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/henna-virkkunen_we-have-awarded-a-180-million-tender-for-activity-7450806469697900544-pAmY
https://eurostack.eu/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/combined-german-eurostack-letters.pdf
https://eurostack.eu/thegermanletter/
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/euro-stack_eurostack-letter-to-de-leadership-activity-7432742973827805185-Uql9
The European Commission (EC) awarded the €180 million tender for sovereign cloud to the four European providers
https://europeansting.com/2026/04/20/commission-awards-e180-million-tender-for-sovereign-cloud-to-four-european-providers/

Don’t get fooled by “European Sovereign Cloud” offerings

https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyFromEU/comments/1qj1em5/dont_get_fooled_by_european_sovereign_cloud/

what about these ones ?

• S3NS: Thales (FR) + Google Cloud (US)
• AWS: Amazon European Sovereign Cloud GmbH (DE)
• Microsoft: Bleu (Orange + Capgemini, FR)
• Oracle: Oracle Deutschland GmbH (DE)

https://getsovereign.cloud/

Hi all, for an upcoming holiday trip I need a Type 2 to Type 2 charging cable (and will keep it in the car for rainy days afterwards).

So far I found the following brands:

Lapp - Made in Germany

Phoenix Contact - Might be produced in Poland, but I only read that in a single webshop, so not sure about that, if you have more knowledge let me know

Any suggestion, there has to be significantly more choice out there?

Thank you!

Private German rocket makes history, reaches orbit from European soil.

I find European digital sovereignty important, but providers have every reason to present themselves as sovereign as possible. What sits behind those claims? Who owns the service? What happens to the data? Which suppliers does it depend on? And can I trust the data?

I built the Sovereignty Index to make these questions much easier to answer:

https://sovereigntyindex.eu/

I shared an early version of this project here about five months ago, when it was still part of eurotechguide.com. The feedback helped me improve it considerably. I’ve now rebuilt it as a standalone index, with 200 services in the beta and another 150 planned over the coming weeks.

It compares European and non-European services using public evidence about ownership, legal control, operations and important suppliers. Every result links to its sources, so you can inspect the evidence yourself. The methodology builds on the European Commission’s Cloud Sovereignty Framework.

I’d welcome feedback from people interested in European digital services. If you look up a service you know, does the result give you a fair and useful picture?

Disclosure: this is my project. Research is AI-assisted and not every fact is manually verified. There is a commercial licensing option for providers, but it cannot influence their assessment or score.

I got gifted this fragrance like 2-3 years ago and it's been my go to ever since. But as Dsquared2 is a Canadian brand, I am looking for a European perfume with a similar smell.

That's it.

Tuta Mail & Calendar instead of Gmail

OpenStreetMap instead of Google Maps

Mozilla Firefox instead of Chrome

GrapheneOS instead of Android

F-Droid instead of Google Play

KeePass Site instead of Google Pass

Wire instead of Google Meet

Ente instead of Google Photos

Fairphone instead of Google's Pixel

Ecosia instead of Google Search

https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1w7887z/worlds_biggest_sovereign_wealth_fund_plans_to_cut/ Norway’s sovereign wealth fund has proposed cutting the allocation of government bonds in its $2.3 trillion investment portfolio, chiefly affecting its holdings of U.S. Treasurys, as it seeks to diversify its risk exposure and boost returns.

The heads of Norges Bank Investment Management wrote in a letter to the country’s Finance Ministry, made public Friday, that it recommended reducing the government subindex of its bond holdings from 70% to 50% — a level it said would provide sufficient liquidity during market turbulence while allowing it to seek greater returns elsewhere.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/euro-stack_eurostack-letter-to-de-leadership-activity-7432742973827805185-Uql9

To the Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz

To the Federal Minister for Digital Affairs and State Modernisation Dr. Karsten Wildberger

To the Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy Katherina Reiche

Berlin, February 24, 2026

Open Letter: Digital Sovereignty for Europe — Act Now

Dear Federal Chancellor,

Dear Federal Minister,

Dear Federal Minister,

100 days after the German-French Summit on Digital Sovereignty, we are writing to you as

representatives of the European technology industry with urgent concern. The course set by the

summit in November 2025 is at risk of being reversed — not because the arguments for digital

independence have grown weaker, but because a well-organised counter-lobby is gaining

momentum. Allow us to shed light on the central arguments of this campaign:

Why a surprising new alliance between traditional industry and hyperscalers must not be

allowed to undermine “Buy European” efforts in the digital sector

The current debate around “Buy European” is being dominated by an alliance that surprises at first

glance: traditional industrial conglomerates and American hyperscalers are joining forces against

“European preference” in procurement. Industry fears retaliatory measures in its export markets;

hyperscalers fear for their European business. The result is a conflation of two fundamentally

different situations: in the automotive and chemical sectors or in mechanical engineering, the

argument that Europe is too internationally intertwined for an ambitious industrial policy may be

worth debating — we do not wish to pass judgement on that. In the digital sector, however, this

approach is dangerous.

Europe’s digital dependency is structurally different and dramatically deeper than in other sectors:

cloud infrastructure, AI compute capacity, and large parts of the enterprise software market — the

foundations of the modern economy — are controlled by three US corporations. These systems

have long since taken on the functions of critical infrastructure: they host state data, control

emergency systems, and secure economic continuity. A continent that has fully outsourced its digital

basic supply to foreign providers is open to coercion. The current geopolitical situation — with a US

administration that openly deploys technology as a lever of pressure — makes this vulnerability not

hypothetical, but acute.

We therefore demand that the Federal Government draw a clear distinction, at both the German

and European level, between the concerns of traditional industries and digital sovereignty. The

interests of the export industry must not lead to European preference in the digital sector being

abandoned. Whoever conflates these two strands — deliberately or not — is doing the

hyperscalers’ work for them.

The “WTO argument” is a lobbying position, not a legal principle

The second main argument against “Buy European” runs as follows: European preference in IT

procurement violates WTO rules and the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). Europe

would become a protectionist and risk retaliatory measures from friendly states. This argument

sounds legal. It is not — it is political.

First, every major economic power deploys demand-side instruments. The US has done so since

1933 with the Buy American Act, which obliges federal agencies to favour domestic providers.

China requires no equivalent legislation. There, European providers are simply denied market

access through administrative means. Europe would thus be the only major economic bloc to bind

itself unilaterally.

Second, Europe’s own WTO compliance record is less spotless than its public self-presentation

suggests. According to independent analyses, the EU has robustly implemented WTO rulings that

English translation of the orginal version in German from

February 24, 2026

went against it in fewer than 40% of cases. As former US Trade Representative adviser Beth

Baltzan has documented, this is entirely within the framework of the rules-based system: those who

lose and choose not to change accept countermeasures. This is the lived trade policy of all major

actors. The fiction that WTO rules are immovably sacrosanct for Europe is a selectively deployed

narrative.

Third, EU primary law with Article 346 TFEU provides an explicit framework for measures to protect

essential security interests — and digital infrastructure unquestionably meets this threshold today.

The Federal Government should not defensively ignore this latitude, but deploy it offensively.

Our request

We ask the Federal Government to take a clear position in the ongoing IAA process: European

preference in the digital sector is not protectionism — it is the minimum of industrial policy common

sense that every other economic power practises as a matter of course. Germany must prevent a

coalition of export interests and hyperscaler lobbying from undermining the “Buy European” concept

precisely where Europe is most vulnerable: in the digital realm. We are ready to invest and to build.

We ask you to secure the political backing for this.

With kind regards and on behalf of the EuroStack Initiative Foundation,

Cristina Caffarra, Paul-Henri Charrier, Stefane Fermigier, Frank Karlitschek, Yann Lechelle,

Wolfgang Oels, Felix Styma, Andy Yen (Board members — alphabetical order)

[info@euro-stack.eu](mailto:info@euro-stack.eu) | EuroStack Initiative Foundation e.V. | Albrechstr. 14B, 10117 Berlin

An den Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz

An den Bundesminister für Digitales und Staatsmodernisierung Dr. Karsten Wildberger

An den die Bundesministerin für Wirtschaft und Energie Katherina Reiche

Berlin, Februar 24, 2026

Offener Brief: Digitale Souveränität für Europa — Jetzt handeln

Sehr geehrter Herr Bundeskanzler,

sehr geehrter Herr Bundesminister,

sehr geehrte Frau Bundesministerin,

100 Tage nach dem Deutsch-Französischen Gipfel zur digitalen Souveränität schreiben wir Ihnen als

Vertreter der europäischen Technologiewirtschaft mit dringlicher Besorgnis. Die Weichen, die der Gipfel im

November 2025 gestellt hat, drohen zurückgestellt zu werden - nicht weil die Argumente für digitale

Unabhängigkeit schwächer geworden wären, sondern weil eine gut organisierte Gegenlobby an Fahrt

gewinnt. Erlauben Sie uns, die zentralen Argumente dieser Kampagne auf diesem Wege näher zu

beleuchten:

Warum eine überraschende neue Allianz aus traditioneller Industrie und Hyperscalern die

Bemühungen um “Buy European” im digitalen Sektor nicht gefährden darf

Die aktuelle Debatte um „Buy European“ wird von einer Allianz dominiert, die auf den ersten Blick

überrascht: traditionelle Industriekonzerne und amerikanische Hyperscaler ziehen gemeinsam gegen eine

“europäische Präferenz” in der Beschaffung zu Felde. Die Industrie fürchtet Gegenmaßnahmen in ihren

Exportmärkten; die Hyperscaler fürchten um ihr europäisches Geschäft. Das Ergebnis ist eine Verwischung

zweier grundlegend verschiedener Situationen: im Automobil- und Chemiesektor oder im Maschinenbau

mag das Argument, dass Europa international zu verwoben ist für eine ambitionierte Industriepolitik,

diskutierenswert sein - das wollen wir nicht beurteilen. Im digitalen Sektor ist dieser Ansatz jedoch

gefährlich.

Die digitale Abhängigkeit Europas ist strukturell anders und dramatisch tiefer als in anderen Sektoren:

Cloud-Infrastruktur, KI-Rechenkapazität und große Teile des Marktes für Unternehmenssoftware - die

Grundlagen der modernen Wirtschaft - werden von drei US-Konzernen kontrolliert. Diese Systeme

übernehmen längst Funktionen kritischer Infrastruktur: Sie hosten Staatsdaten, steuern Notfallsysteme und

sichern wirtschaftliche Kontinuität. Ein Kontinent, der seine digitale Grundversorgung vollständig an

ausländische Anbieter ausgelagert hat, ist erpressbar. Die aktuelle geopolitische Lage - mit einer

US-Administration, die Technologie offen als Druckmittel einsetzt - macht diese Verwundbarkeit nicht

hypothetisch, sondern akut.

Wir fordern daher, dass die Bundesregierung auf deutscher und europäischer Ebene klar zwischen den

Belangen traditioneller Industrien und digitaler Souveränität unterscheidet. Die Interessen der

Exportindustrie dürfen nicht dazu führen, dass eine europäische Präferenz im digitalen Sektor aufgegeben

wird. Wer diese beiden Stränge zusammen wirft, betreibt bewusst oder unbewusst das Geschäft der

Hyperscaler.

[info@euro-stack.eu](mailto:info@euro-stack.eu) | EuroStack Initiative Foundation e.V. | Albrechstr. 14B, 10117 Berlin

Das “WTO-Argument” ist eine Lobbyposition, kein Rechtsprinzip

Das zweite Hauptargument gegen die Bemühungen um ein “Buy European” Prinzip lautet: eine

Europäische Präferenz bei der IT-Beschaffung verstoße gegen WTO-Regeln und das Government

Procurement Agreement (GPA). Europa werde zum Protektionisten und riskiere Vergeltungsmaßnahmen

befreundeter Staaten. Dieses Argument klingt juristisch, ist es aber nicht - es ist politisch.

Erstens setzt jede große Wirtschaftsmacht nachfrageseitige Instrumente ein. Die USA tun dies seit 1933 mit

dem Buy American Act, der Bundesbehörden zur Bevorzugung heimischer Anbieter verpflichtet. China

benötigt keine analogen Gesetze. Dort wird europäischen Anbietern der Marktzugang schlicht administrativ

erschwert. Europa wäre also das einzige große Wirtschaftsgebiet, das sich einseitig bindet.

Zweitens ist Europas eigene WTO-Compliance-Geschichte weniger makellos als die öffentliche

Selbstdarstellung suggeriert. Nach unabhängigen Analysen hat die EU WTO-Entscheidungen, die gegen

sie ergingen, in weniger als 40 % der Fälle tatkräftig umgesetzt. Das ist, wie die frühere Beraterin des

US-Handelsbeauftragten Beth Baltzan dokumentiert hat, vollkommen im Rahmen des regelbasierten

Systems: Wer verliert und sich entscheidet, nicht zu ändern, akzeptiert Gegenmaßnahmen. Das ist gelebte

Handelspolitik aller großen Akteure. Die Fiktion, WTO-Regeln seien für Europa unverrückbar gottgegeben,

ist eine selektiv eingesetzte Erzählung.

Drittens bietet das EU-Primärrecht mit Artikel 346 AEUV einen expliziten Rahmen für Maßnahmen zum

Schutz wesentlicher Sicherheitsinteressen - und die digitale Infrastruktur erfüllt diesen Tatbestand heute

zweifellos. Die Bundesregierung sollte diesen Spielraum nicht defensiv ignorieren, sondern offensiv nutzen.

Unsere Bitte

Wir bitten die Bundesregierung, im laufenden IAA-Prozess klar Stellung zu beziehen: Europäische

Präferenz im digitalen Sektor ist kein Protektionismus — sie ist das Minimum an industriepolitischer

Vernunft, das jede andere Wirtschaftsmacht selbstverständlich praktiziert. Deutschland muss verhindern,

dass eine Koalition aus Exportinteressen und Hyperscaler-Lobbyismus das „Buy European“-Konzept

ausgerechnet dort untergräbt, wo Europa am verletzlichsten ist: im Digitalen. Wir sind bereit zu investieren

und zu bauen. Wir bitten Sie, dafür den politischen Rückhalt zu sichern.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen und stellvertretend für die EuroStack Initiative Foundation,

Cristina Caffarra, Paul-Henri Charrier, Stefane Fermigier, Frank Karlitschek, Yann Lechelle, Wolfgang

Oels, Felix Styma, Andy Yen (Mitglieder des Vorstands - alphabetisch)

[info@euro-stack.eu](mailto:info@euro-stack.eu) | EuroStack Initiative Foundation e.V. | Albrechstr. 14B, 10117

Berlin

https://eurostack.eu/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/combined-german-eurostack-letters.pdf

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/euro-stack_eurostack-letter-to-de-leadership-activity-7432742973827805185-Uql9

I want to buy shoes in a large size.
My foot is about 32 cm long, and I usually wear sizes in the 48–49 EU range.
It’s important to me that they’re made in the European Union, and it would be ideal if they were vegan.
Does anyone know of any brands like that?