I think you're abusing the saying "at scale, rare events aren't rare" (https://longform.asmartbear.com/scale-rare/ https://longform.asmartbear.com/scale-rare/ e

I think you're abusing the saying "at scale, rare events aren't rare" (https://longform.asmartbear.com/scale-rare/ https://longform.asmartbear.com/scale-rare/ etc.) here. It is true that when you are running thousands of machines, events that happen rarely happen often, but that scale usually becomes relevant at thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or millions of things (https://www.backblaze.com/cloud-storage/resources/hard-drive-test-data https://www.backblaze.com/cloud-storage/resources/hard-drive...). That concept is useful when the scale of things you have is the same order of magnitude as the rate of failure. But we clearly don't have that here, because even at scale, these events aren't common. Like I said, there have been, across all cloud providers, less than a handful over a decade. Like, you seem to be proclaiming that these kinds of events are common and, well, no, they aren't. That's why they make the top of HN when they do happen.