3 ms·

I think there is a strange psychological trait that I have, and others may as well, where I am much more forgiving breaking my own stuff than having someone els

I think there is a strange psychological trait that I have, and others may as well, where I am much more forgiving breaking my own stuff than having someone else do it.

media-trivial 5y ago
People are more forgiving torwards themselves and their own folks, I can understand that. I'm just thinking it's important to make decisions based on facts. Some self-hosters walk around with this "my own basement is safer than Amazon datacenters" attitude and that's just not true (in most cases, I guess :D).
- fisf 5y ago
  No. The basic assumption is only, that if I pay somebody money for the service and to keep things running, then sudden data loss is unacceptable (and a multi week downtime even more so). Some companies cannot operate effectively without atlassian products, so a fuckup of that scale might just have legal consequences depending on whom it hits.
  - vntok 5y ago
    > Some companies cannot operate effectively without atlassian products Kind of their problem to be frank. > so a fuckup of that scale might just have legal consequences depending on whom it hits. Any contract those companies signed would have a cap on the retributions by Atlassian for trashing SLA targets
- akho 5y ago
  In my years of selfhosting personal stuff I never had a service “sunset“, never lost data, and never had significant downtime. In the external services I use, downtime of one service or other is to be expected at least a few times a year, and the “sunsets” happen occasionally. Thing is, public services are solving a much more difficult problem (keeping things running safely for millions).
kodah 5y ago
When you host Jira yourself, the monthly subscription pays for Software + Software updates. When Atlassian hosts it for you, you're paying for Software + Software Updates + Service (hosting). When you hosted yourself, a team gets blasted for not monitoring it or updating it correctly. When Atlassian fails to do it (and charges for it) then they get the heat. All that to say, I don't think it's a weird phenomenon, it's just you're realizing that you're paying someone else for something that's not delivered on.

I think there is a strange psychological trait that I have, and others may as well, where I am much more forgiving breaking my own stuff than having someone else do it.

media-trivial 5y ago

People are more forgiving torwards themselves and their own folks, I can understand that. I'm just thinking it's important to make decisions based on facts. Some self-hosters walk around with this "my own basement is safer than Amazon datacenters" attitude and that's just not true (in most cases, I guess :D).

fisf 5y ago
No. The basic assumption is only, that if I pay somebody money for the service and to keep things running, then sudden data loss is unacceptable (and a multi week downtime even more so). Some companies cannot operate effectively without atlassian products, so a fuckup of that scale might just have legal consequences depending on whom it hits.
- vntok 5y ago
  > Some companies cannot operate effectively without atlassian products Kind of their problem to be frank. > so a fuckup of that scale might just have legal consequences depending on whom it hits. Any contract those companies signed would have a cap on the retributions by Atlassian for trashing SLA targets
akho 5y ago
In my years of selfhosting personal stuff I never had a service “sunset“, never lost data, and never had significant downtime. In the external services I use, downtime of one service or other is to be expected at least a few times a year, and the “sunsets” happen occasionally. Thing is, public services are solving a much more difficult problem (keeping things running safely for millions).

kodah 5y ago

When you host Jira yourself, the monthly subscription pays for Software + Software updates. When Atlassian hosts it for you, you're paying for Software + Software Updates + Service (hosting). When you hosted yourself, a team gets blasted for not monitoring it or updating it correctly. When Atlassian fails to do it (and charges for it) then they get the heat. All that to say, I don't think it's a weird phenomenon, it's just you're realizing that you're paying someone else for something that's not delivered on.