I don't really understand this fear. My commercial real estate lease is just someone elses building.. Yeah and so what? I don't want to be a landlord, and I don't want to operate a data center.
If I can't rely on somebody else's data center, I'll happily operate a data closet. How many of us have compute needs that ever span beyond a single server rack? Being one of a million customers has so many downsides that can be avoided by decentralizing.
This argument doesn’t make sense for a number of reasons:
1. The overhead of running a single rack is likely the same as running 5-10 racks. You’re paying a huge amount of overhead for comparatively little value.
2. A single rack can be rented pretty cheaply. Even if it’s 50% cheaper to run yourself, 50% of a small number isn’t that much money.
3. What’s more likely, the cloud going down or the power in your closet going down? How much redundancy does your closet have?
This highlights why it’s counterproductive to have religious fervor for or against the cloud. There are use cases where it makes sense, there’s no silver bullet of where and how to build your business infra.
> Building yourself a house != becoming a landlord.
That's the point.
I have a landlord to handle things that break or need work. Yes, I'm paying to not worry about it but that price premium can be worth it if you value the flexibility.
How can you own your house and not be your own landlord? That's the entire point of the purchase. You take on all those responsibilities and all that work instead of outsourcing it.
It isn't the fact that you choose to lease over own. It's that this lease is a dependency that many organizational layers, MBA changes, etc, get ignored to the point that it's treated like ownership and people make choices as if they own the underlying stack.
Then outlook goes down. Then America elects a dictatorship. Your tech stack starts licking fascist boots, etc.
This link is unusable for me. I don't know what soargram.io is, but on my firefox desktop, it looks like a cursed love-child with all the worst parts of youtube, twitter and substack.
I can't even figure out if this content is supposed to be video, article or a microblog post. It just says "click the cover to read". I click things. Nothing happens. I don't know what the cover is or if I'm clicking it.
Same. No clue what that is. I click "the button", doesn't do anything.
Edit: @parent and Imgur. So if you right-click/hold on the pseudo-youtube-video-thingy, it's a rasterised image of some "the vault" webpage and then you can open/save it and read a junky png.
The button in the corner of the "video viewport"-looking region, that looks like a "make this video full-screen" button, opens the article as a scrollable... thing (an image, AFAICT?); but it also does in fact make that view full-screen. So I dunno.
Weird site. It behaves like YouTube on mobile but tapping the actual article just loads a rasterized image of it? Can't select or copy anything.
I also don't see how anyone remotely technical could've arrived at conclusions like "the cloud being magical" while "the cloud is just someone else's computer" has been the singular de facto standard response to "the cloud" since the hype started.
Their premise is that someone didn't follow AWS recommendations to be availability zone resilient had downtime when a single AZ went down. Which obviously means cloud is dead. Dumb article.
I agree and have seen the cloud hype die out in the industries I am involved in as well, which is good for my specialization.
I don't really understand this fear. My commercial real estate lease is just someone elses building.. Yeah and so what? I don't want to be a landlord, and I don't want to operate a data center.
If I can't rely on somebody else's data center, I'll happily operate a data closet. How many of us have compute needs that ever span beyond a single server rack? Being one of a million customers has so many downsides that can be avoided by decentralizing.
This argument doesn’t make sense for a number of reasons:
1. The overhead of running a single rack is likely the same as running 5-10 racks. You’re paying a huge amount of overhead for comparatively little value.
2. A single rack can be rented pretty cheaply. Even if it’s 50% cheaper to run yourself, 50% of a small number isn’t that much money.
3. What’s more likely, the cloud going down or the power in your closet going down? How much redundancy does your closet have?
This highlights why it’s counterproductive to have religious fervor for or against the cloud. There are use cases where it makes sense, there’s no silver bullet of where and how to build your business infra.
Building yourself a house != becoming a landlord.
> Building yourself a house != becoming a landlord.
That's the point. I have a landlord to handle things that break or need work. Yes, I'm paying to not worry about it but that price premium can be worth it if you value the flexibility.
Right. And there is a shared services agreement between landlord and tenet that gets enforced as well.
If you can’t get the cloud provider to hold up their end of the deal then that’s an enforcement problem and isn’t unique to cloud services.
How can you own your house and not be your own landlord? That's the entire point of the purchase. You take on all those responsibilities and all that work instead of outsourcing it.
A professional landlord (someone who rents property to others) is a whole different bunch of responsibilities, deadlines and expectations
yeah, but it's this xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2347/
It isn't the fact that you choose to lease over own. It's that this lease is a dependency that many organizational layers, MBA changes, etc, get ignored to the point that it's treated like ownership and people make choices as if they own the underlying stack.
Then outlook goes down. Then America elects a dictatorship. Your tech stack starts licking fascist boots, etc.
It's a bit more than "I know what I have bro"
>Your tech stack starts licking fascist boots, etc.
What is this referring to?
Ruby
Matz did what?
This link is unusable for me. I don't know what soargram.io is, but on my firefox desktop, it looks like a cursed love-child with all the worst parts of youtube, twitter and substack.
I can't even figure out if this content is supposed to be video, article or a microblog post. It just says "click the cover to read". I click things. Nothing happens. I don't know what the cover is or if I'm clicking it.
Same. No clue what that is. I click "the button", doesn't do anything.
Edit: @parent and Imgur. So if you right-click/hold on the pseudo-youtube-video-thingy, it's a rasterised image of some "the vault" webpage and then you can open/save it and read a junky png.
The button in the corner of the "video viewport"-looking region, that looks like a "make this video full-screen" button, opens the article as a scrollable... thing (an image, AFAICT?); but it also does in fact make that view full-screen. So I dunno.
Plus the article has a lot of ai-isms in it. "It wasn't just this - it was this" etc
What a bizarre site. It appears to be a screenshot of some other site, and you're supposed to click the expand icon to view it. Who would want this?
Weird site. It behaves like YouTube on mobile but tapping the actual article just loads a rasterized image of it? Can't select or copy anything.
I also don't see how anyone remotely technical could've arrived at conclusions like "the cloud being magical" while "the cloud is just someone else's computer" has been the singular de facto standard response to "the cloud" since the hype started.
Their premise is that someone didn't follow AWS recommendations to be availability zone resilient had downtime when a single AZ went down. Which obviously means cloud is dead. Dumb article.