We migrated some services to AKS because the upper management thought it was a good deal to get so many credits, and now pods are randomly crashing and database nodes have random spikes in disk latency. What ran reliably on GCP became quite unpredictable.
Exact same story at my place. Upper management decided it's a good idea to build on Azure because Microsoft promised some benefits. Things that ran reliable on GCP now need active firefighting on Azure
Interesting!
We're using AKS with huge success so far, but lately our Pods are unresponsive and we get 503 Gateway Timeouts that we really can't trace down.
And don't get me started on Azure Blob Tables...
In our case, we spent to much time of engineer time just to put up with Azure but there’s no good ROI. It took sometime for the upper management to realize Azure is shit and cut the cost
> I've never seen an SLA which is clear cut enough to be worth pursuing if you want more than a free t-shirt.
I have, regularly. I am not sure what kind of business you are running but parties that rely on service providers for critical (primary business process driving) components routinely agree to SLAs with large penalties and the ability to open up an existing contract in case of non-performance. Obviously you would have to be willing to pay for such a service in the first place otherwise there is no point in setting up an SLA, this won't be cheap. But we're definitely not talking about 'free t-shirts' here, more about direct liability, per hour penalties and so on.
By the time SLA thresholds are being breached you've been through months (or years) of pain. They're not strong enough or specific enough to save you from a bad provider. ymmv
Colo and cloud providers that provide real SLAs exist. But they're pricey because they tend to insure against breach of that that SLA and they pass on the cost of that insurance. If you're a run-of-the-mill e-commerce company then it probably doesn't make much sense. But if you yourself are providing critical services to others and they have you by the short hairs in case you don't perform you better make sure that you're not going to end up holding the bag.
One simple example: energy market services, 15 minute ahead and day ahead markets require participants to have the ability to perform or they will be penalized severely, to the point where they can lose that access, the damage of which could easily be in the 10's of millions to 100's of millions depending on their size. Asset owners and utilities both would be able to hit them hard if they do not perform, the asset owners for lost income and the utilities for both government penalties and possibly for outages and all associated costs. These are not the kind of contracts you enter into lightly.
Exactly what I was thinking. But then again, from what I've seen, the persons responsible for monitoring uptimes are often much further removed from the C suite in these "committed-spend" companies.
At least the US still has energy infrastructure, while the EU is forced to financially support Dictators in Tehran and Moscow to keep their economy from collapsing.
Oil is (close to) fungible, which means the higher prices in US fuel pumps are just as much financially supporting dictators in Tehran and Moscow as EU fuel pumps.
Ironically, the "close to" part is just enough to prevent the USA from isolating itself from the world market by refining and using what it currently exports.
Pretty sure the US does not buy energy from natural gas pipelines to Russia, neither are we shutting down all of our Nuclear Power Plants (like Germany) because it's green to import more gas ?
As an American I couldn't tell you what their logic is exactly.
> Pretty sure the US does not buy energy from natural gas pipelines to Russia, neither are we shutting down all of our Nuclear Power Plants (like Germany) because it's green to import more gas ?
Irrelevant. Natural gas isn't the only fossil fuel, the US trades oil on the global market, that oil trade cannot help but support all other petrostates.
To use the table that the chart is supposed to be based on, the peak of nuclear production in Germany was only about 60% of 2025's renewables, 284.6 TWh renewables in 2025 vs 169.6 TWh nuclear in 2000: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stromerzeugung_in_Deutschland
Gambling is flourishing not because we're in a low-trust world, as the article says, but because the living conditions of an increasingly large part of the population as such that they cannot hope of ever achieving a comfortable life. We're returning to the social dynamics that dominated much of history (if you consider how much gambling was a scourge, from ancient Rome to thousands of years of history in China).
Still, yes. I can trust that if I were in an accident, people passing by would be decent enough to try to help me. To see a place where you'd have the rational expectation of being robbed by passers-by, see Russia.
The original intent of the authors is by now irrelevant. The current "point" of git is that it's the most used version control solution, with good tooling support from third parties. Nothing more. And most people prefer to use it in a centralised fashion.
That doesn't remove the fact that when people are working on the code, their local copy doesn't disappear after they pushed their commits and a local copy is still available.
Only exception is when people are using the code editor embedded in the "forge" but this is usually an exceptional use rather than the norm.
> That doesn't remove the fact that when people are working on the code, their local copy doesn't disappear after they pushed their commits and a local copy is still available.
It doesn't remove it but doesn't make it very relevant either, because of all the tests that are necessarily done remotely and can't be done locally, and without that feedback in many cases development is not possible.
So those people are using the tool incorrectly, and would have a much better experience if they used it as designed. If everyone was running around using screwdriver handles to pound in nails, that wouldn't make it reasonable to say that any new screwdriver company has to have 5 lb handles.
reply