Dutch central bank ditches AWS and chooses Lidl for European Cloud

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

The Dutch central bank’s plan to move from Amazon Web Services to StackIT, the cloud platform of supermarket giant Lidl’s parent company, is prompting debate over Europe’s dependence on U.S. tech infrastructure. Commenters weigh the trade-offs between data sovereignty and the relative immaturity or higher cost of European cloud offerings, with many arguing that vendor lock-in to any hyperscaler is a strategic risk. Others use the news to revisit broader questions about whether critical institutions like banks should instead run their own infrastructure or rely more on open, portable technologies.

Motivation for switching from AWS

  • Dutch Central Bank (DNB) wants a “European cloud” to reduce dependence on foreign IT providers, viewing US hyperscalers as an operational/sovereignty risk.
  • Some see this as partly political pressure; others stress central bank independence and argue that if the bank calls it a risk, that’s sufficient.
  • Using a German provider is framed as acceptable because it’s still EU, and multi-country dependence is seen as better than reliance on one foreign country.

What “Lidl cloud” actually is

  • The cloud is provided by StackIT, part of the Schwarz Group (owner of Lidl and Kaufland), not by Lidl as a grocery brand.
  • Multiple comments note Schwarz is huge in revenue and headcount; calling it “a discount grocer” is seen as misleading.
  • Under the hood StackIT reportedly uses OpenStack with its own API.
  • Practitioners describe it as solid but still maturing; others complain about poor account onboarding and a rough marketing website.
  • Pricing is said to be higher than low-cost European hosts like Hetzner and “not a discount cloud.”

Sovereignty, EU policy, and alternatives

  • German and European firms are described as sensitive about data leaving the EU.
  • The move is seen in light of an EU “sovereign cloud” procurement framework that also benefits other providers like Scaleway.
  • Some argue critical institutions like central banks should ideally run their own data centers and retain deep in-house infrastructure skills.

Cloud lock-in, self-hosting, and costs

  • Large subthread debates AWS-style managed services vs running VMs/bare metal with open-source tooling.
  • Arguments for self-hosting:
    • Easier to switch providers, avoid deep proprietary lock-in.
    • Cloud providers allegedly charge 5–10× bare-metal costs.
  • Arguments for managed cloud:
    • Small teams avoid hiring multiple specialists (DBA, network, Kubernetes, etc.).
    • Vendors handle 24/7 operations, backups, failover; teams focus on product.
  • Several comments describe a gradual “lock-in funnel” driven by cloud sales and cost-optimization pitches.
  • Some doubt that mid-sized organizations can realistically replicate services like S3/DynamoDB with a few VMs, given the engineering effort.

Reception and skepticism

  • Many are pleased to see a move away from US big tech; others note the contract isn’t yet executed and cloud migrations are hard and often fail.
  • Some criticize that this just swaps US tech giants for EU billionaire-owned empires.
  • Thread also contains extensive humor about “discount grocer clouds” and supermarket-themed cloud branding.