|
|
|
|
|
|
by latchkey
1388 days ago
|
|
|
Move them where? As we've seen more recently with the OFAC list blocking... once one big player starts to block, the rest follow suit pretty quickly. Remember also that a lot of the large staking players are staking on AWS and also have other external factors which dictate where they can host (taxes, corporations, shareholders, etc). Many of the large players are also tied to AWS deployment APIs... moving means rewriting those. Ever worked with terraform before? It isn't just some trivial thing to point at another provider. |
|
|
Google Cloud, Azure, deploy a server yourself, etc.
> As we've seen more recently with the OFAC list blocking... once one big player starts to block, the rest follow suit pretty quickly.
There's a big difference between something that is made illegal (eg the OFAC sanctions) and a private action by a company. If your service is illegal then you are going to have other problems than just AWS refusing to host.
> Many of the large players are also tied to AWS deployment APIs... moving means rewriting those.
There's a big difference between using AWS as dumb compute and using AWS features.
The more AWS features you use the more control AWS has. The same applies to any software you use - if a license can be withdrawn there is an element of control. These things are much more important than if the physical machine you are running on is owned by Amazon.
As I said above: Control is the important thing.