You're right that if the state really wants you, they can always resort to physical force, but that's exactly the point. In the current system, they don't have to kick down any doors, they just send a silent request to a corporate office and get everything they need without you or your neighbors ever knowing. Forcing them to physically show up at a specific address in the real world drastically changes the "cost of surveillance," it turns a cheap, automated dragnet into a slow, expensive, and public operation.
As for the Hillary Clinton example, that’s actually a perfect lesson in what happens when you prioritize convenience over security. Her setup was "shadow IT" at its worst, it had open ports, unencrypted connections, and none of the basic hardening we use in modern sovereign stacks like Docker or NixOS. It wasn't built for resistance, it was built to bypass government record-keeping, and that lack of professionalism is exactly why it failed.
The "Amazon engineer" might only see bytes, but the Amazon algorithm sees your entire life story, your politics, and your vulnerabilities. If we use end-to-end encryption, it doesn't matter if the guy hosting the box is a neighbor or a stranger, they can't read the data anyway. We aren't just following random guides, we are building professional-grade infrastructure that makes the "dragnet" fail by design. If the state has to kick down a door for one person's data, the system is at least forced to follow a transparent process again.