towerful

Years ago, I played with AWS then contacted their support to make sure any AWS billing to my account was disabled.
I thought I'd try it again recently, and couldn't log in.
I still don't think I'm missing anything.

I'd rather have VPS or server providers where I know exactly what I'm getting per month no matter what, tho I've ran near data transfer surcharges.

Oh, it's expected costs.
Like, figure out the compute requirements of your code, multiply by the cost per compute unit (or whatever): boom, your cost.
Totally predictable.
Compared to suddenly having to replace a $20k server that dies in your data center.
So much easier.

Except when your code (let's be honest, the most likely thing to have an error in it... At least compared to some 4+ year old production hardware that everyone runs) has a bug in it that requires 20x compute.
But maybe that is a popularity spike (the hug-of-death)! That's why you migrated to the #cloud anyway, right? To handle these spikes! And you've always paid your bills so... Yeh, here's a 20x bill.

The amount of software that is limited free self-hosted but the next tier of "self hosted" is enterprise and thousands per year is ridiculous.
Absolutely ridiculous.

Like, you have self hosted. I like your software, I use it personally and that's why I'm using it for (and recommending it to) small businesses. They could afford your 10-100 per month for whatever extra features, but they don't want to rely on 3rd party hosting. They want to host it themselves.
But the only way to get those features is to go for some "cloud" bullshit they don't control, or to pay "enterprise" prices.

It's why I make part of what I make/charge a contribution to the products and projects I use and recommend.
I'll set all that up and tailor it to your company, but anything and everything I recommend/implement is standing on the shoulders of giants. So pay those giants.
Although I think I'm lucky with the people I work for, in that that are interested in the tech, but not the detail.

Such a framework for a government to properly adopt FOS software would require provisions against a "bad government" controlling said software.
Just because the US is plummeting into a political nightmare doesn't mean the EU couldn't do the same I. 20-40 years.

Such a framework of governments moving from Microsoft/Google/Amazon/Cloudflare/Whoever to a FOSS equivalent should require the target Foss platform to be run by an independent non-profit that cannot be politically influenced.

But I have no idea how to actually future proof that from corruption. Because money talks, and billions can buy so much influence in so many unexpected places

If you think curiosity without rigor is bad, you should see rigor without curiosity

I hope I typed that right. I couldn't copy the alt text from the source on mobile.
And I was annoyed that XKCD alt text wasn't included with the post, so I thought I would include it to the best of my ability

I presume US schools have to buy/rent busses and pay bus drivers? Specifically to drive kids to/from school?
Instead of the council (or whatever) subsidising routes that connect new builds to schools, and giving under 16s free bus travel.

This seems like a fantastic example of "if a metric becomes a target, it fails in being a metric".

Michelin Stars? Yeh, the tyre company recommending restaurants

Ah, lol.
Is that the web interface? Or what app is that?

Autopilot crashes?
You mean MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System)?
It's not autopilot. It's worse than that.

Due to the larger engines needing to be mounted in a different place, the flight characteristics changed between previous gen 737s and the new 737 MAX.

The characteristic change would mean it needs different certification from air authorities and existing 737 pilots would require recertification to be able to fly the new 737 MAX (which is supposed to be just an updated model).
All very expensive for what should be merely an upgraded model.

To avoid this, Boeing used software to change the characteristics in order to bring it inline with previous 737s and the existing certifications.
And as it was just an augmentation system, it was deemed high risk but not critical risk. As such, it didn't require full redundancy, didn't require Quick Reference Handbook entries incase of issues/errors, and didn't require training.
In fact, pilots had no idea it existed, what it could do or how it worked.

Which means when it had an issue and caused extreme pitch down due to faulty sensor readings, the pilots had literally no idea what was happening as they were trying to stop the plane from accumulating pitch down every 5 seconds.

And then Boeing tried to fuck with the narrative. I think they also didn't tell pilots about MCAS until after the Ethiopian Airlines crash (the 2nd caused by MCAS), but I'm not 100% sure on the timeline.

Boeing has had a stream of QA issues, the way MCAS was handled was idiotic, they are a shitty company.

But I have no issues flying in a Boeing.
I don't like or trust the company, but I trust the air authorities. And most of all, I trust the pilots.

Yup.
But in open source it CAN be noticed, by anyone determined enough to dig into its side effects.
Proprietary software? You file a regression bug that startup takes 500ms longer, and it might get looked at.

Also, backdoors that are discovered in open source software improve automated software auditing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cewd82p09l0o

I think that's the link to the video?
Seems like it's part of a longer video...

Edit:
Hhmmm here is a slightly longer video that doesn't really add anything

Actual edit:
I genuinely couldn't find a better source video