Posted by speckx 3 hours ago
PRs without problems don't really grant any credit against those with problems. I see it it a fraction of PRs. Seeing it sometimes is enough to establish evidence.
"The team had reached a point where it was too risky to make any code refactoring or engineering improvements. I submitted several bug fixes and refactoring, notably using smart pointers, but they were rejected for fear of breaking something."
From the submitted blog post.
Right?
As opposed to a pile of unmaintainable shit
I don't see what's different today. Some will never learn, but of those who do they'll try things, fail, and then build systems to prevent making those same mistakes again.
AI thrives within those systems.
Now they have an outage that should honestly result in people going to prison, at some point we have to question leadership's ability to... well lead because unless something drastically changes I don't think society wants to deal with a massive transnational trillion+ corporation with various monopolies that controls many aspects of our lives if they're going to continue to give us shit service.
I wish it’d be only global north boomers but India and much of South East Asia also runs on freaking M$ and not unlikely that excel is big in China too.
While we can engineer a system with better availability, seems the market is quite ok with one or two nines for this.
So the trick would be not to make anything truly critical depend on such a service. And no, payroll is not enough, I'm talking OT.
There's only warm fuzzies for helping fix or find OSS but the drive for resilient systems hasn't died.
Other bits of the stack are fine. It's not a flat world.
I know Germany wanted to migrate to Linux but decided to stick to Windows after all.
Same in Sweden, they tried moving away, but then gave up.
Both were headlines a while ago.
Basically migrating away from Microsoft has always a significant cost even for partial replacements. The democratic systems and shareholder pressure makes it hard to keep long-term projects going in the Western countries and companies. Choosing Microsoft has never costed an election nor caused significant share price but going against it has economic and legal risks.
So without a dictating government with nuclear reasons, you will not get enough pressure to move away.
The NSA lost control of EternalBlue which resulted in billions of dollars of economic damage globally:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EternalBlue
They didn't offer any compensation either.
Imagine the Huggingface incident, but with an agent swarm that's deliberately malicious instead of just misaligned.
Most of the analysis and summary that demands LLMs is public data... massive amounts of data. Otherwise, it wouldn't be "warfare". It would just be spying.
This is why agents discovering vulns en masse is pretty great in the long run, it gets ahead of these sort of malicious hoarding shitheads with more resources than ethics.
That's the same situation as before AI: many developers don't have time/resources/expertise to prevent the advanced exploits, and few very advanced players do.
Edit: and you've spent time in Shanghai too! Small world!
“Microsoft is too big to go down, why do we need a redundancy?” Another round, barkeep.
“Amazon won’t ever have downtime, they’re huge! Our workloads are much safer there.” Make that two, what with MEC1-AZ2 being a smoking hole.
“Why would we need backups when these providers offer us a five-nines SLA?” Sorry, make that three, since Google’s EU-WEST-2-B AZ lost power and its redundancies failed to start.
Now don’t get me wrong, nothing is perfect or bulletproof. That being said, the more eggs you put into a single basket, the more of them get damaged if something happens to said basket.
Everyone lost the plot on backups, redundancy, and diversification in favor of single, “do it all” providers and hyperscalers.
What could possibly go wrong?
It's clear from the wording of the updates that Microsoft took the better part of a day to even figure out what was happening, and that they're throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks, instead of following the kind of precise recovery plan that they would have had, had they understood their own systems.
What do you expect amz to do about the drone strikes haha.
if you absolutely needed your servers in an active war zone for some reason cant imagine you'd have five 9s either
That being said, I do distinctly remember being called an alarmist for warning that if a plurality of compute is in one physical area, and said compute serves a large amount of customers, then that space is a gigantic soft target.
“Nobody is going to attack a datacenter, stego-tech, you’re being completely unreasonable.”
Mmm, delicious schadenfreude.