<p>This article advances three interconnected theses concerning the philosophical, ethical, and socio-political implications of the digital and analogue relationship. The first thesis argues that digital representations (models) increasingly mediate our cognitive and practical engagement with reality (systems), resulting in epistemic abstraction and potential oversights (“the eclipse of the analogue”). Through examples from healthcare, engineering, and finance, the article illustrates how uncritical dependence on models can obscure crucial aspects of analogue realities, leading to significant errors and adverse consequences. The second thesis contends that, at the same time and only apparently paradoxically, analogue factors—such as rare earth minerals, energy infrastructures, and physical hardware—are becoming central to the control and governance of digital technologies (“the hardware turn”). Despite digitalisation’s rhetoric of immateriality and virtuality, power increasingly resides with those who control the analogue conditions of possibility underpinning the digital domain. Consequently, the third thesis proposes a normative framework for addressing this twofold challenge. The article argues for the necessity of three complementary strategies: enhanced education (<i>Paideia</i>) to foster critical awareness of digital mediation; robust legislation (<i>Nomos</i>) to ensure ethical governance and mitigate systemic risks; and a redefined conception of <i>digital sovereignty</i> capable of democratically controlling the interconnected digital–analogue landscape and implement the appropriate Paideia and the right Nomos. In the end, Heidegger’s metaphysical critique of technology is contrasted with Weil’s ethically oriented approach, advocating a constructive and relational philosophy of technology to counter the detrimental impacts of the eclipse of the analogue and the hardware turn.</p>