81–90 of 158 posts
This means their EBITDA now probably shows profitability (servers they own are amortizable [the A in EBITDA], where are AWS is expensed.) Edit: Amortization/Depreciation can generally be used interchangeably.
Maybe but OpEx is tax deductible. CapEx is not.
Is 500 petabytes really that epic? 1500 tapes? I could probably stuff that in the back of my minivan.
Great comment for 2017. I would like to see the 1987 version and the 2037 version of it.
And I did have a flashback to my first hard drive, all 220 glorious megabytes of it, and a great deal more expensive than "a decent lunch", and get a sweet hit of that yeah... I am in the future, aren't I? feeling.
Can we remove /amp/ from the end of the URL? Some people still use HN on a laptop or a desktop. Also, as mentioned elsewhere in the comments here, it should be retitled to "Why Dropbox decided to drop AWS"
Why is there always so much hate for amp on HN? I'm on a PC and I vastly prefer these pages to the huge/bloated default pages offered by so many publishers. Using the TC page linked in the original post as an example, if I turn on Ghostery it blocks 22 trackers! https://imgur.com/a/iTnlT On the Amp page, it only catches one: https://imgur.com/a/P7mww
Though it's less of a problem with self-hosted AMP, but still a problem because it's still tech from company that might choose to improve web and can very well do it with Chrome market share, but instead decide to replace it with own thing.
I have good reasons to not trust Google because over years they provided worse experience for Firefox on their own services and it's still annoyingly true on Android.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah and that's why it amazes me that Netflix uses Amazon a straight competitor that uses the money it makes from Netflix to compete with Amazon prime.
I hear this line of thinking a lot but I don't really buy it. You could just as easily say it's amazing that Amazon allows a competitor like Netflix to run on it's platform. The reality is that relationship is more complex than that.
Amazon letting them run on AWS is brilliant as they get a piece of Netflix's pie. So even if Netflix beats Amazon Prime, Amazon gets to dip into their pot via revenues from AWS. It's a great hedging of bets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Early SSL/TLS termination is to reduce latency; the longer-lived connections from PoPs to Dropbox datacenters is over a TLS 1.2 connection with PFS. See an earlier blog post[1]: > We use TLS 1.2 and a PFS cipher suite at both our origin data centers and proxies. Additionally, we’ve enabled upstream certificate validation and certificate pinning on our proxy servers. This helps ensure that the edge proxy server knows…
Does this change the legal/geo jurisdiction of the SSL/TLS handshake?
What does AWS do when someone moves 500PB of storage off of their systems? Do they sit idle till some other big customer comes along or is their growth so phenomenal that a 500PB move off doesn't even slow new (storage) deployments at all and just keep up their pace?
let's assume they have 12 buildings at each region with 500 racks in each. 6k racks
Let's assume that S3 is 1/4 of their infrastructure.
Let's assume you can put 60 * 12TB disks in 4U and they use 52 racks. That's 136012TB per cabinet or 9.4PB per rack.
1500 racks at 9.4PB raw capacity with RF=2.1 so best case that's that's 1500 * 9.4 / 2.1 = 6700PB at a site.
So 500PB would be 7% of the space.
They're probably growing 5-15% per month like most hot companies now, so that's 1-2 month's growth.
Of course these numbers are certainly off. But probably in the magnitudinal ballpark.
What does AWS do when someone moves 500PB of storage off of their systems? Do they sit idle till some other big customer comes along or is their growth so phenomenal that a 500PB move off doesn't even slow new (storage) deployments at all and just keep up their pace?
with no actual facts, i'll speculate. let's assume they have 12 buildings at each region with 500 racks in each. 6k racks Let's assume that S3 is 1/4 of their infrastructure. Let's assume you can put 60 * 12TB disks in 4U and they use 52 racks. That's 13 60 12TB per cabinet or 9.4PB per rack. 1500 racks at 9.4PB raw capacity with RF=2.1 so best case that's that's 1500 * 9.4 / 2.1 = 6700PB at a site. So 500PB would be…
But who knows...
Can we remove /amp/ from the end of the URL? Some people still use HN on a laptop or a desktop. Also, as mentioned elsewhere in the comments here, it should be retitled to "Why Dropbox decided to drop AWS"
Why is there always so much hate for amp on HN? I'm on a PC and I vastly prefer these pages to the huge/bloated default pages offered by so many publishers. Using the TC page linked in the original post as an example, if I turn on Ghostery it blocks 22 trackers! https://imgur.com/a/iTnlT On the Amp page, it only catches one: https://imgur.com/a/P7mww
"We’re talking about a company that had 1500 employees, with just around a dozen on the infrastructure team" - what the rest 99% of the company is doing, marketing?
https://blogs.dropbox.com/tech/2016/05/inside-the-magic-pock...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, Netflix only runs some of their infrastructure on AWS. Basically, if I understand correctly, their applications run on AWS and their delivery is through their own CDN built on top of various ISPs[1]. [1] https://media.netflix.com/en/company-blog/how-netflix-works-...
Correct, but some is probably an understatment. They are pretty much run everyting on AWS except what you cited (e.g video processing and content delivery). Netflix is the biggest AWS user.