After last week’s major Amazon Web Services (AWS) outage took Signal along with it, Elon Musk was quick to criticize the encrypted messaging app’s reliance on big tech. But Signal president Meredith Whittaker argues that the company didn’t have any other choice but to use AWS or another major cloud provider. “The problem here is […]
I’m getting a “we know the best” vibe from signal.
There are MANY alternatives to AWS. Sunk cost fallacy is a hell of a drug…
Has nothing to do with sunk cost, and more to do with there only being three hyper scaling cloud providers
You’re arguing with someone who hasn’t read the article…
Three is more than one.
Azure and GCP has less uptime than AWS. I guess you could roll with one of the Chinese providers like Alibaba Cloud or Tencent Cloud.
and how exactly is azure or google cloud better?
Or how about using multiple to not have a single point of failure?
because they can barely keep the lights on with one provider. but I’m sure you will be a long-term signal backup subscriber, and until then you are regularly sending them donations.
rofl how pathetic of a response. This is similar to the, “let’s see you make better” from someone saying, “this food tastes like shit.”
How is using multiple providers such a massive increase in expense? They’d be able to share the load, so it doesn’t have to be a doubling of expense or even necessarily a significant increase in any universe what so ever.
Because most prices are scaling down if you increase the use.
Buy 1 server -> pay 1 money units
Buy 100 servers -> pay 90 money units
Buy 10000 servers -> pay 8500 money unitsIf you decrease the bought amount and distribute it among multiple suppliers, you pay more, because you have multiple lower tier packages.
And I’m pretty sure they have at least a bit something like that, because while signal was slow, it didn’t fail completely like other stuff.
And no the response wasn’t pathetic, your misunderstanding of basic economics is, to stay in your aggressive style
