And yet a single availability zone in AWS going down caused an outage?

You have it backwards.

There are some very few specific use case that most companies don’t ever meet that makes AWS cheaper. In the vast majority of use cases it is an order of magnitude more expensive.

It’s never been cheaper. It’s so much easier to scale. It’s never been cheaper. Well, maybe at a very low usage rate. But, at scale, it’s never been cheaper.

Buying server hardware is a lot more difficult and with more lead time than just buying a computer. Plus you then have to build your server infrastructure out in a data center. It takes a lot of time, and specific logistical skills. AWS is far easier to scale your services then doing it yourself, especially if you have extremely high peaks that you have to serve.

If AWS was cheaper then hosting, they wouldn’t make money.

Hitler.

Stalin, for what he was, wasn’t fascist.

You effectively have no user id’s with chatmail relays with DeltaChat. Routing of messages uses the default TCP/IP stack and so you can just use TOR if you want to. Mentioning a chat systems ability to use TOR, as if that should be a part of the chat program rather than the system it self seems strange to me.

I’ve run a matrix server with around 250 local users. The schema Matrix uses is fundementally flawed that leads to excessive resource usage, and the DB is very easy to corrupt. Plus, the encryption key management sucks in comparison to DeltaChat and SimpleX.

Federated servers, Multiple device access without the phone app being open, Decades old tried and true backend protocol that would be a problem to ban.

Also https://webxdc.org/

Definitely continue the fight, but in the meantime, migrate to something like DeltaChat.

It looks like it did

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Nothing you wrote was a response to what I wrote.

I also don’t care what you ‘studied’. I lived it. Google and Apple were literally, and this is a quantifiable fact and not an opinion as you seem to be treating it in your response, the 10 person startups that were going against industry behemoths.

Yahoo was, at the time, was a Juggernaut.

I.B.M., at the time, was a Juggernaut.

Google and Apple were once the 10 employee nobodies going against behemoths.

Google also used to have no lock in, as well. It’s original selling point was an open ecosystem with no lock in, unlike Apple.

You’re like a walking definition of ‘those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it’

Irans retaliatory strikes defending against Israel’s unjustified cowardly sneak attack to start a fight the Israelis were to weak to win.

There, I fixed the title for you.

He absolutely redefined to justify killing children. Bush didn’t do that. It was used, under Bush, to justify torture and jailing of adults.

Obama re-invented it for his purposes. The purpose being to kill children without consequence.

In my mind, that definitional change is significant enough that he owns a lot of that blame.

Fucking goddammit, he redefined the word to justify killing children. Why do you defend that?

EDIT: Removed indirect articles for easier readability, content is the same.

It was under Bush to justify imprisoning civilians. Bush was all for direct war actions.

Obama massively increased bombings and drone bombings to pull out combat troops and would do stuff like double tap weddings. To lower the number of civilian deaths, Obama declared any male over the age of 14 to be, by definition, an enemy combatant.

The person you responded to was correct, though a bit imprecise with their words.

Why would you have sympathy for Israel attacking without provocation a state that turned out to be stronger than they thought?

XMPP

The staffers helped murder 5 million people.

25 trucks a day is still starvation conditions for most people.