Some orgs really do have lousy availability figures (such as my own, the Navy).

We have an environment we have access to for hosting webpages for one of the highest leaders in the whole Dept of Navy. This environment was DOWN (not "degrade availability" or "high latencies"), literally off of the Internet entirely, for CONSECUTIVE WEEKS earlier this year.

Completely incommunicado as well. It just happened to start working again one day. We collectively shrugged our shoulders and resumed updating our part of it.

This is an outlier example but even our normal sites I would classify as 1 "nine" of availability at best.

Army, here. We're no better. And of course a few years back the whole system for issuing CACs was off for DAYS.

This feels like it's a common thing in large enterprisey companies. Execs out of touch with technical teams, always pushing for more for less.

Yep, things should be made clear to whoever cares about your service's SLA that our SLA is contingent upon AWS's SLA et al. AWS' SLA would be the lower bound :)

All I’m hearing is that you can make up your own availability numbers and get away with it. When you define what it means to be up or down then reality is whatever you say it is.

#gatekeep your real availability metrics

#gaslight your customers with increased error rates

#girlboss

What are you trying to imply with that last hashtag?

It’s a meme; search it on Twitter. It’s a play on “live, laugh, love” that started as a way for young women to mock pandering displays of female empowerment but has grown in scope so that it can be used to mock anyone.

     #gatekeep #gaslight #girlboss

or the male equivalent

     #mansplain #manipulate #malewife