Selfhosted

But if everyone else is down too, you don't look so bad 🧠

It's mostly a skill issue for services that go down when USE-1 has issues in AWS - if you actually know your shit, then you don't get these kinds of issues.

Case in point: Netflix runs on AWS and experienced no issues during this thing.

And yes, it's scary that so many high-profile companies are this bad at the thing they spend all day doing

It is still a logical argument, especially for smaller shops. I mean, you can (as self-hosters know) set up automatic backups, failover systems, and all that, but it takes significant time & resources. Redundant internet connectivity? Redundant power delivery? Spare capacity to handle a 10x demand spike? Those are big expenses for small, even mid-sized business. No one really cares if your dentist's office is offline for a day, even if they have to cancel appointments because they can't process payments or records.

Meanwhile, theoretically, reliability is such a core function of cloud providers that they should pay for experts' experts and platinum standard infrastructure. It makes any problem they do have newsworthy.

I mean,it seems silly for orgs as big and internet-centric as Fortnite, Zoom, or forturne-500 bank to outsource their internet, and maybe this will be a lesson for them.

Do you really want someone like the magahats having control over something like that?

It should be seized by the ~~government~~ people and mercilessly decentralized.

Why do we place so much reliance on one mega company? This level of importance.

Because it's cheaper and (in broad terms) more reliable than everybody having a data centre.

It should be seized by the government.

Oh yeah, what could possibly go wrong if the US government owned Amazon!

AWS aggressively pursues high priced and years-long spending commitments with large customers, and they incentivize it with huge discounts for doing so.

And when AWS does this they intentionally incentivize these large customers to migrate existing workloads away from other cloud service providers as well, going so far as to offer assistance in doing so.

My friend messaged me on Signal asking if Instructure (runs on AWS) was down. I got the message. That being said, it's scary that Signal's backbone depends on AWS

I have been able to use Signal like any other day. I haven’t seen any disruption in sending or receiving.

Well, you see, the mistake you are making is believing a single thing the stupid AWS status board says. It is always fucking lying, sometimes in new and creative ways.

If your health check is broken, then you might not notice that a service is down and you'll fail to deploy a replacement. Or the opposite, and you end up constantly replacing it, creating a "flapping" service.

You guys don't selfhost a registry?