zlacker

[parent] [thread] 12 comments
1. Shekel+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-06-29 17:51:34
Pretty much every company has been shown to have fake status pages at this point.
replies(5): >>ezekg+k2 >>klysm+x3 >>wsatb+M3 >>Night_+P3 >>AYBABT+C4
2. ezekg+k2[view] [source] 2023-06-29 17:58:53
>>Shekel+(OP)
Pretty much. They want the burden of proof for SLAs to fall on the customer, not on themselves. If a customer has to prove that an outage specifically affected them, they are much less likely to have a successful case against the failure to meet their SLA.

(Not directed at GitHub specifically, but at bogus status pages.)

3. klysm+x3[view] [source] 2023-06-29 18:03:12
>>Shekel+(OP)
fake and not automated are pretty different
4. wsatb+M3[view] [source] 2023-06-29 18:03:53
>>Shekel+(OP)
From my experience, GitHub is the best out there when it comes to updating their status page.
5. Night_+P3[view] [source] 2023-06-29 18:03:56
>>Shekel+(OP)
Really? Why?

That's so disappointing.

replies(1): >>cududa+c7
6. AYBABT+C4[view] [source] 2023-06-29 18:06:16
>>Shekel+(OP)
Status pages are updated by humans and the humans need to (1) realize there's a problem and (2) understand the magnitude of the problem and (3) put that on the status page.

It's not fake, it's just a human process. And automating this would be error prone just the same.

replies(3): >>Macuyi+B5 >>wsatb+98 >>jachee+IA
◧◩
7. Macuyi+B5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-29 18:09:22
>>AYBABT+C4
Very good points. Meanwhile I have clients asking me why they can't have a status page to which I reply: you can, but ultimately to be completely fail proof it will be a human updating it slowly. To which they reply: but GitHub or X does it...

Very infuriating, that.

replies(1): >>AYBABT+k7
◧◩
8. cududa+c7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-29 18:15:07
>>Night_+P3
Two technical reasons capstoned by driving business motivation:

-False positives -Short outages that last a minute or three

Ultimately, SLA's and uptime guarantees. That way, a business can't automatically tally every minute of publicly admitted downtime against the 99.99999% uptime guarantee, and the onus to prove a breach of contract is on the customer

◧◩◪
9. AYBABT+k7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-29 18:15:47
>>Macuyi+B5
There's some nice tooling these days for this. E.g. https://firehydrant.com/ and https://incident.io both make this a faster, more embedded process.
replies(2): >>sjwhit+2e >>amanda+6Q
◧◩
10. wsatb+98[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-29 18:19:37
>>AYBABT+C4
I wouldn't necessarily call them fake, but the issue often has to be big enough for most companies to admit to it. AWS often has smaller outages that they will never acknowledge.
◧◩◪◨
11. sjwhit+2e[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-29 18:46:32
>>AYBABT+k7
Hey, incident.io CEO here! Thanks for mentioning us.
◧◩
12. jachee+IA[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-29 20:35:09
>>AYBABT+C4
Also (2b) convince their boss that the “optics” are better to update sooner than later.
◧◩◪◨
13. amanda+6Q[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-06-29 21:54:08
>>AYBABT+k7
And Jeli.io for this! With the Statuspage integration, you can set the status, impact, write a message for customers, and select impacted components all without leaving Slack. Statuspage gets updated with a click of a button.
[go to top]