2 ms·
That's a very naive view. At the customer size of Twitter, it's more like the old adage. If you owe the bank $1MM it's your problem, but if you own the bank $
by funstuff007 4y ago
That's a very naive view. At the customer size of Twitter, it's more like the old adage. If you owe the bank $1MM it's your problem, but if you own the bank $100MM it's their problem.
- lolc 4y agoYes and when refusing service Amazon would not be fulfilling their part of the contract. Negotiations would be harder for them in that case. Cutting service is the very last cudgel to come out for large contracts. And only when counterparty's insolvency is looming. Which may or may not be the case for Twitter. If Amazon concluded Twitter's insolvency was near it would certainly negotiate on the contract. Before cutting service. Which is why it's interesting to watch Amazon's reaction here.
- seo-speedwagon 4y agoIt’s funny to think about AWS doing hardball arm twisting stuff like “we moved all your S3 objects into Glacier Deep Storage, we’ll be happy to help you retrieve them once we straighten out this little problem with your bill” But I think what you’re saying seems more likely