No one expects zero risk, it's about reducing risk. I choose to avoid American companies in favour of non-American competitors because the American government is hostile to privacy and is a warmonger.
> and is a warmonger.
This is flamebait unrelated to data privacy risk. If you don't want to use American companies because you have an political opposition to supporting US companies, that's also a valid opinion. You don't have to twist it into a data privacy argument.
It's not flamebait, it's a legitimate reason. A country who has been killing people in various wars/invasions is unlikely to behave ethically when it comes to privacy.
If you behave unethically in one area, I have every reason to assume that you'll also behave unethically in another area.
Rather than drawing a broad hand-wavy link between ethics concerns and respect for privacy, you'd be much more accurate in measuring privacy by directly considering their practical legal frameworks that protect privacy.
> A country who has been killing people in various wars/invasions is unlikely to behave ethically when it comes to privacy.
This doesn't hold up. There are many countries that will straight up man-in-the-middle internet traffic with no oversight that have been at peace longer than Germany.
Some are worse than others. America is one of the worst. War, invasions, mass surveillance, mass incarcaration...
A country like America that has been murdering people in many wars around the world without hesitation is unlikely to take my privacy seriously. They don't respect my right to live, do you think they will respect my right to privacy?
Several countries in SE-Asia have been at peace for much longer and will happily man-in-the-middle your internet traffic at the whim of their unchecked government powers [e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Vietnam].
A country's participation in war and their effective protections for privacy are not strongly correlated, demonstrably so.