Earlier quoted context omitted.
Infrastructure (ops, software, hiring, social) matters. Hiring some dude won't give you that.
Hiring the right dude will. The trouble is, most of them are happily employed elsewhere.
at AWS/Google? :P
Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
41–50 of 88 posts
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#42Looks like wunderground.com is down too. If you're wondering, high chance of thunderstorms this evening in New York, NY.
I was wondering, thanks. Rain has been wild recently
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#43I'm not the best at interpreting this map[0] but seems that something is going on? [0] http://www.digitalattackmap.com/#anim=1&color=0&country=ALL&...
What's the significance of Poland in the output? A tracking thing? I noticed problems with Reddit earlier, too.
Where are you seeing 'Poland in the output'?
>Edit: Nevermind, I see what you mean (on the map). I'd be interested to know too... maybe PL is a big player in their attack monitoring?
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#44Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#45Turkey?
I don't understand the relation/reference. I'm Turkish and have been watching the news but I don't see any reason why someone correlates large websites being down with Turkey. With no explanation too. Can you elaborate please? This is an honest question and I would like to know if my government is hacking foreign sites in retaliation for sanctions.
[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
This just doesn’t make sense. Google/Amazon employees basically are some random DevOps “dudes”. Whereas your own people would be...whoever you decided to hire to work on your infrastructure.
Infrastructure (ops, software, hiring, social) matters. Hiring some dude won't give you that.
Problem being that Infrastructure is made to be very, very compicated because they're selling tons of managed features that have reliance upon each other. I don't know why this idea of having your own devops is suddenly now bad. renting your own bare hardware and managing solutions yourself is still very much a thing and something you have to do if you're using lots of bandwidth. Dropbox for example made their own infrastructure to get off of AWS [1].
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/15/why-dropbox-decided-to-dro...
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#47Whatever is happening, it got me out of bed instead of browsing endlessly
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#48I suppose I came late because only gnu.org is down of those mentioned.
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#49Turkey?
I don't understand the relation/reference. I'm Turkish and have been watching the news but I don't see any reason why someone correlates large websites being down with Turkey. With no explanation too. Can you elaborate please? This is an honest question and I would like to know if my government is hacking foreign sites in retaliation for sanctions.
Well Trump obliterated any chance of a decent lira value for the next years with his tweets and sanctions.
Re: Ask HN: Plenty of large sites down; Reddit.com, GNU.org, Discord, coincidence?
#50Is AWS/Azure/GCE down? Remember: the cloud is someone's else computer. When it's broken, you cannot do anything
That's pretty vacuous. Everyone's computer is someone's computer. The more important point is how capable you are at managing it yourself.
What you're trying to get at is this: would you rather trust your infrastructure to a large organization whose core competency it is to do so, or would you rather manage it yourself? For many companies it makes more sense to have someone else manage it because of division of labor.
If you believe you're better suited to managing your own hardware for cost or capability reasons, you should. But of the arguments in favor of that decision, pointing out that "you cannot do anything" when GCP/AWS/Azure has downtime is a pretty poor one. It's an exceptional circumstance if you're 1) able to achieve better uptime than a cloud provider, 2) at nearly the same cost (in personnel, hardware and software), and 3) while being relatively unaffected by the downtime of major cloud providers anyway.
The companies for which the calculus shifts in favor of managing their own hardware probably don't need to be told "the cloud is just someone else's computer." In contrast, most companies using a cloud provider do not have a readily available alternative because they do not have in-house talent capable of maintaining baremetal hardware (local or colocated).
I consider myself personally capable of maintaining a baremetal distributed system with high availability, because I presently do that. But for the most part I wouldn't encourage companies using a cloud provider to invest in their own infrastructure. It's usually expensive in personnel, time or both.