> and they all forgot how to use git revert?
Implying they use any form of VCS at all...
The Knightmare fiasco might serve as a useful datapoint for re-calibrating your expectations:
http://dougseven.com/2014/04/17/knightmare-a-devops-cautiona...
> I hate to sound like a conspiracy wingnut, but it seems unlikely that there were major outages at NYSE, United Airlines, and the WSJ all on the same day and it's merely a coincidence.
My expectations are calibrated at roughly "this is noteworthy?" Taking the long view of things, it seems unlikely it's taken this long for there to be three major outages on the same day. Well, rather, there have been - one wee little "yet another OpenSSL security vulnerability" and half the internet catches on fire, it seems. Or Michael Jackson dies and the full internet catches on fire. (EDIT: Or an AWS region goes down and you make a drinking game out of what popular websites are down because of it.)
Or, even ignoring mass issues like that - I suspect it's likely there have been "three major outages on the same day" before - and we simply didn't notice. I wasn't aware of the United Airlines outage, for example. I didn't notice this. I had to have it called to my attention.
> and they all forgot how to use git revert?
This also ignores the fact that git revert is insufficient for something as simple as an SQL schema change if you don't want to lose data. Rolling back your blog's comments is one thing - they were mostly spam anyways. Rolling back financial transactions is entirely another (breach of contract? Fraud?)
It's entirely possible to generate rollback scripts which handle this, of course. These aren't necessarily faster to execute than it is to fix the actual problem, however, if you've got a sufficiently large database. Murphy's law means you'll hit some edge case, your rollback will fail, and now you're trying to untangle yet another layer of things gone wrong.
(EDIT: Hell, rereading about Knightmare, they tried to rollback. They succeeded, but that just made things worse in the process!)
> Were we cyber attacked today?
Nothing to suggest it was one so far, IMO. Although I'll certainly grant that a "computer glitches" hand-wave isn't a terribly strong indication it wasn't one, either. "Cyber attacks" (what does that term mean to you, exactly, I wonder?) are common enough I wouldn't find it too terribly surprising, though. I can predict my rough reaction: "I guess they were wrong about that."