• 0 Posts
  • 2.91K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2023

help-circle











  • Echo Dot@feddit.uktoTechnology@lemmy.worldCloudfare outage post mortem
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    There are technical solutions to this. You update half your servers, and then if they die you just disconnect them from the network while you fix them and then have your own unaffected servers take up the load. Now yes, this doesn’t get a fixout quickly, but if you update kills your entire system, you’re not going to get the fix out quickly anyway.



  • Echo Dot@feddit.uktoTechnology@lemmy.worldCloudfare outage post mortem
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    So I work in the IT department of a pretty large company. One of the things that we do on a regular basis is staged updates, so we’ll get a small number of computers and we’ll update the software on them to the latest version or whatever. Then we leave it for about a week, and if the world doesn’t end we update the software onto the next group and then the next and then the next until everything is upgraded. We don’t just slap it onto production infrastructure and then go to the pub.

    But apparently our standards are slightly higher than that of an international organisation who’s whole purpose is cyber security.





  • So you’re doing the classic thing of putting the burden of responsibility for your ridiculous claim on to somebody else to disprove. A classic sign of somebody not arguing in good faith.

    How can I prove that Wikipedia only lists facts since any evidence that I present, you will immediately disregard as untrue because of your preconceived bias.

    I want you to link to any article, on any subject matter on Wikipedia (in English so we can actually read it, I know that trick) that proves your claim of bias. I genuinely don’t believe you will be able to because if you could provide this evidence, you would have linked to it in your original comment.

    Your holy scripture arguement doesn’t work because Wikipedia isn’t a fixed source of stated reality, it’s a constantly changing constantly updated website. We know the Bible isn’t objective reality because we’ve had it for a very long time and have been able to test it against known historical accounts, and they don’t match up. Wikipedia on the other hand is updated millions of times a day. Even if an article had some bias, by the end of the first day that bias would have been corrected by someone who didn’t like the bias. But you’re stating that there is a deep rooted institutional bias. I’d like you to indicate it please.