3 ms·

The author makes a good progression in their reasoning but then somehow arrives to the wrong conclusion: > So when someone says that Amazon has invested a lot

by znpy 4y ago

The author makes a good progression in their reasoning but then somehow arrives to the wrong conclusion: > So when someone says that Amazon has invested a lot of money into security I think about the fact that Ubisoft spent $1M on a backup solution that didn’t work for the game that would have had the best use of it. The missing point here is thst ubisoft is/was spending money for something outside of its domain of expertise, and managed to make a suboptimal decision. Amazon however is spending money on two of its core domains of expertise: building and managing datacenters and building and operating web services. Not to mention, aws is very clear and explicit about what is their responsibility and what’s your responsibility (security of the cloud vs security in the cloud). Sad to see such a nice post ending like that.

treis 4y ago
The whole post is clickbait. The million dollar solution was to store source code that they never ever wanted to lose. It (presumably) worked for that. What it didn't work for was backing up user profiles and being able to quickly restore them.
- dijit 4y ago
  The environment that the datadomain was hosted in was not allowed to host source code or raw assets, but the bank vault thing was because of lost source code. The issue is that most games just fire off into the void if they need to backup and restores are never tested.
dijit 4y ago
I wrote the article in a fit of anger because someone (on hackernews) said that Amazon spent a lot of money on security therefore its better than whatever [you] could possibly need. The main thesis of the post is that sometimes incentives are not aligned and you still need to think critically about what you bought and what its intended purpose is, the cost of a thing does not mean it fits your need. You can pull a train with a Bugatti Veyron, but its not the right tool just because it costs as much or more than a train does.
- yathaid 4y ago
  "The main thesis of the post is that sometimes incentives are not aligned" Sure, but your example of AWS and security is exactly the opposite where incentives are aligned. "but its not the right tool just because it costs as much or more than a train does. " Yes, and you didn't investigate the impedance mismatch between your tool (PgBackRest) and your backup system. What this has to do with your stray bullet to AWS I have no idea.
  - dijit 4y ago
    >where incentives are aligned. If I had been streaming and not reading then Ubisofts solution would have been the right one. But the situation was as such: I didn't know what the incentives or intentions were; and others didn't either because all they thought was that "the investment had been made". Turning off your brain is the wrong solution, you have to check that your incentives are the same as Amazons
- fsckboy 4y ago
  > its not the right tool just because it costs as much or more than a train does you might want to rethink why it's not a good idea to pull a train with a Veyron; in fact, you might be on to a good excuse to buy a Veyron. quick search: "a diesel locomotive could cost from $500,000-$2 million, while electric locomotives cost between $4,000,000 and $6,500,000"
- znpy 4y ago
  > The main thesis of the post is that sometimes incentives are not aligned and you still need to think critically about what you bought and what its intended purpose is, the cost of a thing does not mean it fits your need. That would have been a better ending.

by znpy 4y ago

treis 4y ago

The whole post is clickbait. The million dollar solution was to store source code that they never ever wanted to lose. It (presumably) worked for that. What it didn't work for was backing up user profiles and being able to quickly restore them.

dijit 4y ago
The environment that the datadomain was hosted in was not allowed to host source code or raw assets, but the bank vault thing was because of lost source code. The issue is that most games just fire off into the void if they need to backup and restores are never tested.

dijit 4y ago

I wrote the article in a fit of anger because someone (on hackernews) said that Amazon spent a lot of money on security therefore its better than whatever [you] could possibly need. The main thesis of the post is that sometimes incentives are not aligned and you still need to think critically about what you bought and what its intended purpose is, the cost of a thing does not mean it fits your need. You can pull a train with a Bugatti Veyron, but its not the right tool just because it costs as much or more than a train does.

yathaid 4y ago
"The main thesis of the post is that sometimes incentives are not aligned" Sure, but your example of AWS and security is exactly the opposite where incentives are aligned. "but its not the right tool just because it costs as much or more than a train does. " Yes, and you didn't investigate the impedance mismatch between your tool (PgBackRest) and your backup system. What this has to do with your stray bullet to AWS I have no idea.
- dijit 4y ago
  >where incentives are aligned. If I had been streaming and not reading then Ubisofts solution would have been the right one. But the situation was as such: I didn't know what the incentives or intentions were; and others didn't either because all they thought was that "the investment had been made". Turning off your brain is the wrong solution, you have to check that your incentives are the same as Amazons
fsckboy 4y ago
> its not the right tool just because it costs as much or more than a train does you might want to rethink why it's not a good idea to pull a train with a Veyron; in fact, you might be on to a good excuse to buy a Veyron. quick search: "a diesel locomotive could cost from $500,000-$2 million, while electric locomotives cost between $4,000,000 and $6,500,000"
znpy 4y ago
> The main thesis of the post is that sometimes incentives are not aligned and you still need to think critically about what you bought and what its intended purpose is, the cost of a thing does not mean it fits your need. That would have been a better ending.