Honest question and frankly scared to ask because it sounds stupid: if you have like 30 mins of downtime on AWS every year and spend 3x cost on managing their infrastructure risk by deploying it on multi-AZ and multi-region (and thereby AWS pushing reliability management back to the customer); is the value proposition of cloud just some dude to install a disk if it goes out on a rack in your office? May be there is a reverse incentive for AWS to keep their AZ's slightly unreliable so that customers spend 3x or 9x or what have you to make sure nothing ever goes down.
Like what's wrong with on-prem? Lack of diesel generators? We could just have that without AWS. Bare metal datacenter. Counter to most opinions, I think managing a server isn't that difficult. I am sort of a semi-professional and prosumer that has no trouble managing servers for years on end with less downtime than a whole fricking datacenter.
There is more serious discussion and new revelations around this [1], [2]. Sometimes it is hard to ask questions about layers of abstractions that have built up and no one dares to think about getting rid of them.
[1] https://www.economist.com/business/2021/07/03/do-the-costs-o...