Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reliability: It’s not great

community.fly.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 476 posts

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#361

Post by LunaSea »

mike_d wrote: post #229
mananaysiempre wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... Are those North American companies prepared to willingly break EU laws then? Because in my (amateur) understanding it’s logically impossible to satisfy both CLOUD Act requirements and EU data protection ones (not just GDPR, but general due-process rights the CJEU considers required for privacy violations and US courts deny noncitizens).

Yes. Whenever a US law and a foreign law conflict, the US law always wins when you are in the United States. Complying with US laws is also a perfectly valid defense if a European citizen or state ends up bringing action against you in a US court.

European states simply sue in their own territory or in front of the European Union Court of Justice.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#362

Post by zamnos »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #324

I've been doing reliability stuff for near two decades. The one thing I am sure of is there is no way to just engineer your way to reliability. That is to say, no person, no matter how smart, can just invent some whizbang engineering thing and suddenly you have reliability. Reliability is a thing that grows, like a plant. You start out with a new system or piece of software. It's fragile, small, weak. It is threatene…

There are no silver bullets for whole system reliability, but high-availability clustered databases was this wiz bang thing that greatly improved the reliability of your database, back in the day. It didn't come cheap, and there were growing pains, but sometimes the available technology does make a difference.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#364

Post by antupis »

Aeolun wrote: post #275
anurag wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Render founder) I'd love to understand why you think this is the only outcome. Render has positive gross margin and a clear path to profitability based on both our growth so far and the tailwinds in this space. I'm also aware of other companies like ours that have grown all the way to IPO or are well on their way. I'm very explicit both internally and externally that an acquisition is a failure mode for Render. We'r…

> I'd love to understand why you think this is the only outcome. I’m curious why you think it isn’t? On a long enough timescale all good things seem to be acquired by large megacorps for a fuckton of money. Slack, Linode, Minecraft, the list goes on. Eventually they all make the thing less than it was before under the founders’ vision. At least from my perspective. It won’t stop me from cheering them on, but I’m stil…

Times are now different money is not free anymore so those big acquisitions need to make real business sense.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#365

Post by unxdfa »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #324

I've been doing reliability stuff for near two decades. The one thing I am sure of is there is no way to just engineer your way to reliability. That is to say, no person, no matter how smart, can just invent some whizbang engineering thing and suddenly you have reliability. Reliability is a thing that grows, like a plant. You start out with a new system or piece of software. It's fragile, small, weak. It is threatene…

You can make sensible assumptions that result in engineering gains though. Step around the problems not through them.

For example I have learned that the first step to reliability is removing as many hashicorp products from your stack as possible though. Appears I am not the only one.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#366

Post by ecmascript »

Wow, posts like these kind of want me to sign up and become a customer. The honesty and openness is something I highly value and it's weird that this is so uncommon that you get surprised by reading stuff like this.

Seems like they have a good understanding what the problems are so they will most likely be solved sooner or later.

Good work and keep honesty as open as you've done so far :)

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#367

Post by o_m »

fmajid wrote: post #62
ec109685 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CloudFlare folks wrote a good blog post on how they are seeing their customers use Edge compute — latency is far down on the list: https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-workers-serverless-we...

The US CLOUD Act means a EU customer cannot use a US cloud provider to host PII, even if the server itself is physically in the EU, because US law will still compel the provider to yield the data to US authorities. The European Commission is trying to paper over the cracks with a fig leaf of judicial review, but it's only a matter of time until a Schrems III decision from the CJEU invalidates that polite fiction.

I got burned by this. I spent a lot of time researching and planning for this, only to discover there is no demand for solving this problem (yet?).

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#368

Post by Kiro »

ricardobeat wrote: post #302
alex_sf wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly related to the OP, but: I think I speak for a large number of folks when I say that we don't care. The EU keeps passing all sorts of absurd laws that require dedicated auditors to comply with. It's just not going to happen. If they decide to actively enforce these things, they'll just isolate themselves from the rest of the world.

As an EEUU resident, we also don't care. We can survive without youtube and instagram and the whole surveillance industry. Some of the laws place a heavy burden on giant tech companies, but for good reason.

You don't speak for me. I don't want to live without YouTube.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#369

Post by arlort »

ricardobeat wrote: post #302
alex_sf wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly related to the OP, but: I think I speak for a large number of folks when I say that we don't care. The EU keeps passing all sorts of absurd laws that require dedicated auditors to comply with. It's just not going to happen. If they decide to actively enforce these things, they'll just isolate themselves from the rest of the world.

As an EEUU resident, we also don't care. We can survive without youtube and instagram and the whole surveillance industry. Some of the laws place a heavy burden on giant tech companies, but for good reason.

Where are you from that you use EEUU as an acronym?

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#370

Post by fauigerzigerk »

onethought wrote: post #340
Aeolun wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd love to understand why you think this is the only outcome. I’m curious why you think it isn’t? On a long enough timescale all good things seem to be acquired by large megacorps for a fuckton of money. Slack, Linode, Minecraft, the list goes on. Eventually they all make the thing less than it was before under the founders’ vision. At least from my perspective. It won’t stop me from cheering them on, but I’m stil…

Spotify, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter (kinda), Valve all have not been acquired and have existed for a long timescale...

That's clearly survivorship bias.

What you want to know is the probability of a small, independent, high quality provider remaining independent, high quality and not bankrupt.

It does seem to be rare in the tech space, especially in the US. Becoming one of the largest public corporations on earth is one way to do it, as you suggested, but the odds of that happening are miniscule.

Post reply on HN