> Kinda scary to think Cloudflare could brick itself.

Never forget that essentially all interesting systems may brick themselves and will at least catastrophically fail every now and then. For all the sales pitches about "the cloud" providing resiliency, it's fundamentally centralizes an ungodly share of the internet onto a handful of failure points.

What had been a frothy background noise of independent hosting and data center failures has become a global blackout risk, where worldwide operations break down and failures cascade through interdependent systems.

On a business level, it's hard to care about that, as you're not going to be held to blame if everything else goes into crisis at the same time as you, but on a societal level, it's kinda f---'d.

It's like moving all the agriculture onto the flood plain. You get maximum abundance most of the time, but when it fails in those inevitable floods, you at least better have kept some stockpiles stored uphill somewhere.

They don't say what the manual/break glass process was exactly. But I likened it to something like a `helm rollback` for a kubernetes helm release. Manual/break-glass doesn't have to mean a team of engineers are logged into VM instances `vi` editing config files back to a previous state and `scp`-ing older binaries over, it just probably means there wasn't an automated build/deploy tool process to perform it.

> Kinda scary to think Cloudflare could brick itself.

I mean.. They are providers of software that iterate on their product suite in a SaaS environment. I think this sentiment holds for pretty much any SaaS company. And I guess if everything is scary then nothing is really all that scary. Do you disagree?

You know how cell sites have gas generators and the gas line uses cell to communicate status? I've always wondered about that one.

Plus would a diesel seller be able to take cash if a data center needed it to start up again. There's plenty more where that thoughts from