01.11.23
Gemini version available ♊︎Sirius ‘Open Source’: Let’s Waste 50,000+ British Pounds on Amazon ‘Clown’ Bills Even Though We Already Have Our Very Own Servers and Racks
Video download link | md5sum b7092ce567dc2abaaf29741f7fd87ae2
Sirius Stuck in Clown Computing
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0
Summary: Sirius does not know what it’s doing. How can Sirius advise clients on hosting when it cannot even do its own hosting right? Colleagues tried to push “AWS” to clients, but I kept standing in the way, saying it would cost a fortune and erode security/privacy (over time I was vindicated as bills constantly soared)
THE VIDEO above is relatively long but it could be far longer. I have a lot of things to say about the shortcomings with clown computing, based on firsthand experience for over a decade. The short story is, avoid clown computing any time it’s possible to shun clown computing. The clown computing pushers (marketing) are untrustworthy; they “appeal to authority” and they’ve long targeted gullible non-technical managers.
“This entrapment is exploited by raising prices ad infinitum — to the point where it becomes so unbearable that the providers lose more clients than they gain in additional surpluses (price hikes).”Disregard their misleading vocabulary (like "serverless"). Call it “clown computing” and don’t say “on-prem”; they’ve utilised this for upselling, exploiting a new buzzword for what was done, correctly, for decades already! A lot of that isn’t even “self-hosted” (another relatively new term); it’s like getting a subdomain in GitHub(.com), which is proprietary and controlled by just one company. There’s that same subdomain mentality of Slack, as it gives false impression (illusion) of control, like “guilds” for chat. All that centralisation is corrosive and very risky. It’s also expensive in the long run (I give the example of FeedBurner, which almost literally burned its own users). When the hosting is controlled by one company the user is at the mercy of this one company; moving from one company to another is often impossible or very expensive. This entrapment is exploited by raising prices ad infinitum — to the point where it becomes so unbearable that the providers lose more clients than they gain in additional surpluses (price hikes). In the case of GitHub, the hosting is controlled by one company; the platform and code are also controlled by that same company (Microsoft).
People need to talk about these issues in abstract and topological terms, only to be challenged by weak-minded folks who speak in buzzwords and brands (like “AWS” and “Amazon”). I’ve sadly found myself unable to communicate these issues with people who act like salesmen rather than software engineers.
“Moving from one’s own servers to Amazon (et al) is as technically sanitary as giving up on toilets at home, choosing to use public toilets instead (“as a service”).”Putting aside financial aspects, AWS has technical issues and occasional downtimes, as noted in passing above (in the video). Lots and lots of examples of that could be given and presented in full. Moving from one’s own servers to Amazon (et al) is as technically sanitary as giving up on toilets at home, choosing to use public toilets instead (“as a service”).
All in all, the video above tells some stories “from the trenches” that we don’t plan to write about (they’re not that scandalous anyway). It does not merely repeat what was covered in the article earlier on. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA