This issue seems to be the typical case of someone being bothered for someone else, because it implies there's no "recognition of source material" when there's quite a bit of symbiosis between the projects.
I blame this on the recent development of "open source as a marketing strategy". I'm getting tired of "open source" products that have restrictive licenses, or that are open source but lock features behind paywalls and subscription plans. It seems open source is just an excuse to ask for "stars" and to get some good will from potential users.
The Open Source world has become what the startup world became: more posers than supporters.
If you're worried that people will steal your code, your idea, or use your product for free, then don't claim it's "open source" and say "source available for auditing purposes" and start paying for contributions.
Everyone talking about Kubernetes as if it was merely a "hyperscaler" and the biggest benefit of Kubernetes over a bunch of custom scripts is consistency and the ability to have everyone work on an industry standard, which makes it easier to onboard new hires, to write scripts and documentation against, etc…
To answer your question directly: yes, that's the point. You may have different clusters for different logical purposes but, yes: less clusters, more node groups is a better practice.
We moved entire infrastructure to AWS last year, to speed up/simplify/rethink it. We lasted 3 months on S3/CloudFront. We are still heavily invested in AWS, but moved our production storage/distribution to R2/Cloudflare and couldn't be happier.
Next up: moving our cloud edge (NAT Gateways, WAF, etc) to Fortinet appliances, which licenses we purchased bundled with our on-prem infra.
I know Corey Quinn always harps on AWS' egress pricing but you really can't emphasize it enough: it's literally extortionary!
VC funding is where cool products/ideas go to die... or sell off to be assimilated.
I don't think VC funding exists if "premium support/enterprise consulting" is the monetization strategy. Either they see monetary value in the product itself and intend to maximize it (aka subscriptions, paid features, etc), or see the IP value and intend to have the business "flipped" for profit.
Same thing with the argument "instead of spending $44B on a cesspool, that money could've ended world hunger".
The reality of poverty, homelessness, hunger, etc, is so much more complex than how much money is put into solving it, that promoting "monetary investment" as a solution for any of these problems is disingenous at best, and downright corrupt at worst.
Can vouch for this. The Discord support, aside from specific account/platform problems, has been most helpful and super friendly, both community members and staff.
Our egress bill from Cloudfront last month, inc. the 1TB/per region free tier, was nearly $2,000. That's egress traffic ALONE (~20TB of it).
Needlessly to say, we're wrapping up testing on migrating our production (public) buckets to Cloudflare (R2) taking our cost from those $2,000 (and going up every month), to (drum roll)... $0,000/mo.
Have I mentioned AWS egress charges are borderline "extortionary"? :X
No need for tinfoil hats. This is a very basic networking consideration: peering. I've worked at ISPs and we would see traffic struggle through some of our contracted peers but not others all the time. It would take a while for all routes to update, and that if we had rerouting setup properly (not always the case). It gets extra complicated when you add BGP to the mix.
Long story short, most ISPs run or are well peered to data centers nearby, which is where speed tests are normally hosted at. For traffic outside of those hops, peering issues can lead to a multitude of issues... and you don't have to be evil for that to happen. No ISPs control the entire IP path between the client and server (with extremely narrow coincidental exceptions).
To be clear, Unsplash never provided images: they created a website that accepted user submissions, that's it. All content in Unsplash is user generated.
What bothers me about this sale is exactly this: Unsplash cashed in on their user submissions without guaranteeing their users (and use!) would be protected and perpetuated.
This is equivalent of me building a little lemonade stand, inviting a neighbor that makes a good lemonade but doesn't have a very visible stand to come give away their lemonade on my stand, and then selling the entire stand (with lemonade) to Lemonade Store down the street.
Blockchain is a useful tech.
Crypto currencies are an interesting idea, but easily manipulated by launderers, i.e. the guys over at Wall Street.
NFTs are basically a ponzi scheme: most of headlining ones are bought by artists themselves, or folks who stand to benefit from NFTs becoming popular.
As with everything, the rule still stands: don't spend money you're not willing to lose. Crypto and NFTs are NOT an investment: they are a gamble… just like most of the stock market "game". :X
From my personal experience, you have another month to wait… I waited 6 months for a withdrawal to be handled. To be fair, I withdrew to the wrong account number (to Simple, to the old account number with Bancorp), but the bank bounced the transfer and the funds were returned within the week. After that, Coinbase drug their feet for 6 months before I finally got the money right around Christmas time (i.e. I initially withdrew in June).
What bothers me even more than horrible communication is the fact that I converted BTC to USD and withdrew the money because I need the cash at the time (baby + move) and never saw it until much later. Had I kept it BTC–which I would've had I not needed it–that same BTC would've been worth about 8x what I got.
I don't want to scream "foul play" but it REALLY seems that way. There's NO WAY it takes 6 months, including a lot of pointless repeated "Have you checked with your bank? We're so sorry it's taking so long."
So yeah… good luck with Coinbase support. FWIW, Coinbase is the reason I'm done with crypto for good (as currency/investment). It's a minefield of bad actors and greed, incredibly susceptible to foul play and literal criminal activity. I willingly paid more fees with Coinbase because I thought they were a legit business… Nope!
I would normally end this with "…but mileage may vary." Not here. Good luck and godspeed, my friend. o/
I would've told you Coinbase until not long ago, but they seem to be going down the drain in terms of support (and I promise: you will at some point need it). It's been over a month for me to even get a single reply to a ticket where there are hundreds of dollars in limbo, and I'm not alone (check their @CoinbaseSupport reply threads)…
Previously, my setup was USD<>BTC at Coinbase, and BTC<>AltCoins at Bittrex… Might try some of the other suggestions for USD<>BTC in the future.
This issue seems to be the typical case of someone being bothered for someone else, because it implies there's no "recognition of source material" when there's quite a bit of symbiosis between the projects.