[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 232 points 5 months ago

Her real comment was that there are only 3 major cloud providers they can consider: AWS, GCP, and Azure. They chose AWS and AWS only. So there are a few options for them going forward — 1) keep doing what they’re doing and hope a single cloud provider can improve reliability, 2) modify their architecture to a multi-cloud architecture given the odds of more than one major provider going down simultaneously is much rarer, or 3) build their own datacenters/use colos which have a learning curve yet are still viable alternatives. Those that are serious about software own their own hardware, after all.

Each choice has its strengths and drawbacks. The economics are tough with any choice. Comes down to priorities, ability to differentiate, and value in differentiation :)

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

What’s the right size for a government? And not just any government — the federal government for the richest country in the world?

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

What do you think is the right course of action? How could the Democrats turn the shutdown into a win?

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

I just think we need to be criticizing more important things than this. Kurz is not the organization we should be spending our outrage on.

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 128 points 6 months ago

That’s really embarrassing that we as a community have chosen, of all possible creators, to deride Kurzgesagt for taking money from The Gates Foundation. It’s 0.05% of their holdings. ZERO POINT ZERO FIVE. Which, by the way, is down from 6% in the past after public concern — yes, a whopping 6%. Scourge of the earth, locked out of heaven: The Gates Foundation. Those computer nerds strike again. And we choose to punish a great content contributor for that. Shameful display of purity politics.

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

I’ll throw in the “well actually” here so no one gets wrapped around the axle — the true point of tariffs are to boost domestic business at the expense of weakening foreign sales. The scales tipped in favor of domestic businesses should be advantageous and arguably a good strategy in some circumstances …in a vacuum. That’s the “well actually” and it’s worth nothing in 2025 because all advantage is nullified if those domestic businesses lack the skill and resources to produce said goods. The industries currently targeted by tariffs are so huge and complex that domestic businesses stand zero chance (even with tariffs) in place to replicate the technology, supply chain, and workforce that would be able to stand competitively toe-to-toe with the global market.

So it’s entirely a tax on Americans by another name, and for zero gain.

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

That’s disappointing. Leading is very different from protesting, and it remains unclear whether Sawant has learned the difference. And if she can’t regularly show up to city council meetings, why should anyone believe she would be able to work with other federal representatives? She’s chaos in a bottle, and that’s no way to govern.

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

Advantageous geography has allowed the US to fall upward in success throughout its existence. It’s as simple as that, no joke. By sitting on a mountain of natural resources and having no formidable enemies in the western hemisphere, the US was the default player to take center stage post WW2. Europe was decimated and America funded the war. Bam, the US gets success in spite of its thoroughly racist and regressive culture. Their position (and hubris) became too entrenched for there to ever be a legitimate contender. We might get to witness a changing of the guard now though, we’ll see how much damage 47 does.

FDR era is an incredible circumstance though. The past North’s failure to reconstruct the South led to all kinds of strategic chess moves that ultimately saw the D and R parties swap. The liberals had to put aside the racism problems for a bit so they could unfuck the economy. It was probably the best that the progressives could have hoped to achieve given their challenges.

All said as an American. So we’re not all morons. But it’s a sticky, uphill battle. I’m not sure if it’s fixable without a big change to the world order. Thanks for the question!

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

NASA's mission is to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery, and aeronautics research. I’ll support any model that enables those principles. They paved the way in the 60s and that’s enabled others to succeed. Isn’t that the highest form of achievement? Look at what SpaceX has done with their massively reusable Falcon 9. The space shuttle flew 135 missions over 40 years; that’s about 3 a year. There’s been 453 Falcon 9 flights (134 in 2024 alone) and a single Falcon 9 stack has been reused 26 times… all of those achievements happened within a span of 15 years. I think it’s safe to say that they’ve mastered the rocket. You’re just seeing the R&D phase of their new one …which has the added spectacle of some rapid unscheduled disassemblies that we get to witness 😉

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Yep. It’s pretty nuts how much they can push over copper. And remember that just having a coax cable at your house doesn’t mean it’s copper the whole way back to the ISP.

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Remember, the universe for those stats are only voters which account for less than half of the total US population.

[-] blakemiller@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

Same thing with TikTok

view more: next ›

blakemiller

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago