<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>mijoharas</author><text>I mean from the explanation[0], assuming that is correct (I don&amp;#x27;t have evidence to suggest it&amp;#x27;s false) - you don&amp;#x27;t need to be multi-cloud, and you don&amp;#x27;t even need to be multi-region. As long as you&amp;#x27;re spread out over multiple availability zones in a region you should be resilient to this failure.&lt;p&gt;Somewhat surprising to see how many things are failing though, which implies, either that a lot of services aren&amp;#x27;t able to fail-over to a different availability zone, or there is something else going wrong.&lt;p&gt;[0] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=29648992&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=29648992&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>Hippocrates</author><text>Every time a major cloud provider has an outage, Infra people and execs cry foul and say we need to move to &amp;lt;the other one&amp;gt;. But does anyone really have an objective measure of how clouds stack up reliability-wise? I doubt it, since outages and their effects are nuanced. The other move is that they want to go multi-cloud... But I’ve been involved in enough multi-cloud initiatives to know how much time and effort those soak up, not to mention the overhead costs of maintaining two sets of infra sub-optimally. I would say that for most businesses, these costs far exceed that occasional six-hour-long outage.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again</title><text>Console is flickering between &amp;quot;website is unavailable&amp;quot; and being up for my team. This is happening very frequently just now, reliability seems to have taken a hit.</text></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>sdevonoes</author><text>Perhaps is us, the customers (and our customers, and the customers of our customers, ...), the ones who should get used to the status of &amp;quot;things can go wrong&amp;quot;? Except for some specific scenarios (medical-related stuff, for instance), if my favourite online shopping place is down, well, it&amp;#x27;s down, I&amp;#x27;ll buy later.</text><parent_chain><item><author>Hippocrates</author><text>Every time a major cloud provider has an outage, Infra people and execs cry foul and say we need to move to &amp;lt;the other one&amp;gt;. But does anyone really have an objective measure of how clouds stack up reliability-wise? I doubt it, since outages and their effects are nuanced. The other move is that they want to go multi-cloud... But I’ve been involved in enough multi-cloud initiatives to know how much time and effort those soak up, not to mention the overhead costs of maintaining two sets of infra sub-optimally. I would say that for most businesses, these costs far exceed that occasional six-hour-long outage.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again</title><text>Console is flickering between &amp;quot;website is unavailable&amp;quot; and being up for my team. This is happening very frequently just now, reliability seems to have taken a hit.</text></story>