iwallace

I like to compare this to Site C in British Columbia https://www.bchydro.com/energy-in-bc/projects/site_c.html#:~.... If you are lucky enough to be blessed with remote untapped rivers that can be dammed in somewhat unpopulated mountain valleys (that's another story again), it seems to be far cheaper and safer. I would imagine that Nuclear power's main issue is first and foremost cost. If you could pull off completely safe nuclear power, it just winds up costing too dang much.

My company uses AWS. We had significant degradation for many of their APIs for over six hours, having a substantive impact on our business. The entire time their outage board was solid green. We were in touch with their support people and knew it was bad but were under NDA not to discuss it with anyone.

Of course problems and outages are going to happen, but saying they have five nines (99.999) uptime as measured by their "green board" is meaningless. During the event they were late and reluctant to report it and its significance. My point is that they are wrongly incentivized to keep the board green at all costs.

I can't find a reference anywhere for this to back it up, but I recall reading that Stephen Wolfram (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wolfram) started Wolfram Research (Mathematica) with 100% remote employees.

Thank you for this post. I'm in nearly the same boat (41 years old, < 1M net worth, on my fifth startup with < 100k to show for those efforts) and watching seemingly complete idiots pass me by. I'm too old to be infuriated by the vagaries of chance, however, it does make me wonder if I've done something wrong. I suspect that the numbers are slightly skewed - that there are far fewer people having wild success than the media would have us believe.