Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by dpedu | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

dpedu·

I'm surprised this isn't law. Should it be?

View on HN

So if you use more electricity next month the CEO of the electric company should be put in jail?

Analogies are not the core of your cognition.

I understand this is snark, but if you think about it, this is already implemented in electrical infrastructure. If I use too much power, the circuit breaker trips to protect me and protect the electrical grid. OP is about a billing breaker, but the parallels should be obvious.

If the CEO of the electric company didn't mandate circuit breakers, he should go to jail.

The breaker in this analogy is equivalent to rate quota limits, it limits peak throughput.

You can rack up an outrageous monthly electricity bill without tripping a breaker.

The peak throughput does result in an overall monthly limit though. For a house with a 200A main breaker, that effectively limits your electric bill to $7,000/month, which is very reasonable compared to the tens of thousands of dollars in a single day that a lot of cloud billing disasters end up costing.

Utilities required for basic survival are expected to remain on for obvious reasons. Like not letting people die.

Why do people think new laws are needed to solve every last problem in the world?

Google implemented caps because their competitors offered them. Before that, customers could choose one of several competitors, rent the GPUs at a fixed rate, or buy the GPUs and install them on-premises.

At no point was any law needed to solve any of this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com