Amazon said (to Congress, no less) that it does not let it's own team responsible to deciding on which products to buy & sell access confidential sales reports of third party sellers that use their platform. And then it was revealed that they regularly do get access to these information.
There's no reasonable expectation that Amazon will not use any data it can easily access to make decisions.
I don't find that your argument regarding "using US created computers" and "US-owned gTLD" holds water. It's very hard to build e.g. CPUs that will contain very advanced backdoors that are totally hidden but can easily be targeted remotely to gather information, and the same goes for secretly using a domain. Additionally, the cost of doing so is astronomically high: the total loss of trust in US chip makers and internet companies. They may very well do that during major wars, but not to steal some company secrets.
On the other hand, it's easy for Amazon to siphon off data from AWS and even just using meta data (e.g. looking at how and when a customer scales to what size) gives you valuable insight into their business. And if they get caught? A few politicians will be annoyed, a few media articles (but hey, they may overshadow reports on unionization, so it's not all bad) and potentially a few companies leaving their platform, while others will undoubtedly say "I have nothing to hide from Amazon, so what?"
In other words the threat model is dramatically different.
Sounds like a lot of conspiracy that isn't going be limited to Amazon so it still doesn't make sense to single out their computing company. If you encrypt your data on your public cloud (like you should), then no, the AWS retail company cannot 'get' your data from the AWS Web Services company.
Sure, Google or Microsoft might look at your stuff aswell - but why would they? Neither of them are in retail so they aren't competitors. If you're developing a new search engine that rivals Google, yeah, I wouldn't host that on Google's infrastructure. Have a serious contender for Microsoft's money cows? Maybe not put your code and issue tracking on GitHub.
Both are definitely in to retail. The are not market places like so that is a difference. (they both have physical and virtual stores where they sell both physical and virtual products and both own-brand as well as third party)
If companies are afraid of other companies looking at their stuff they are essentially going to have to reinvent everything themselves. What about transactions, imagine someone checking what they pay their supplier and what the customer is paying, that'd be scary. So now you can't use off-the-shelf cash registers, banking services, ERP systems etc.
The only difference people are trying to see is that AWS and Amazon Marketplace both have Amazon in the name. They don't have the same people, the same building or the same anything, except the same Bezos at the top.
>It's very hard to build e.g. CPUs that will contain very advanced backdoors that are totally hidden but can easily be targeted remotely to gather information
Wasn't IME a thing for years but people still don't have a great understanding of how it works?
Yes, but it's not hidden, people are aware that it's a threat. And these things do get checked at least, people fuzzing opcodes to expose hidden functionality. It's still generally a terrible idea, but it's not yet "backdoor in a box" like the (so far unfounded as I undestand) allegations against Huawei. Still, if I'm Cisco, I don't run my Wifi off of Huawei access points.
If you're Cisco you might not run a 1:1 competitor's products, but they do use Huawei hardware, i.e. LTE equipment.
Same goes for things like mobile phone manufacturers, they are competing with Samsung, but they will still buy Samsung LCDs for their own phones.
Samsung is a SoC manufacturer, but they will happily buy a SoC from Qualcomm. Same with DRAM, they make that too, but having Micron DRAM doesn't scare them either.
And the circle back to Cisco: they happily use Broadcom switch chips in their Cisco switches.
There's no reasonable expectation that Amazon will not use any data it can easily access to make decisions.
I don't find that your argument regarding "using US created computers" and "US-owned gTLD" holds water. It's very hard to build e.g. CPUs that will contain very advanced backdoors that are totally hidden but can easily be targeted remotely to gather information, and the same goes for secretly using a domain. Additionally, the cost of doing so is astronomically high: the total loss of trust in US chip makers and internet companies. They may very well do that during major wars, but not to steal some company secrets.
On the other hand, it's easy for Amazon to siphon off data from AWS and even just using meta data (e.g. looking at how and when a customer scales to what size) gives you valuable insight into their business. And if they get caught? A few politicians will be annoyed, a few media articles (but hey, they may overshadow reports on unionization, so it's not all bad) and potentially a few companies leaving their platform, while others will undoubtedly say "I have nothing to hide from Amazon, so what?"
In other words the threat model is dramatically different.