this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2025
452 points (90.2% liked)

Technology

73703 readers
3568 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ronno@feddit.nl 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Similar to Microsoft cutting off access to the email server at the International Criminal Court. We need to get our shit together.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Ronno@feddit.nl 1 points 1 hour ago

Basically blocked ICC users access to their email and thus ability to do their job. https://nltimes.nl/2025/05/20/microsofts-icc-email-block-triggers-dutch-concerns-dependence-us-tech

[–] Zacryon@feddit.org 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Crowdstrike already showed very impressively the danger of monopolies.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 14 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Now they're going on a slippery slope. Just what EU needed to convince them entirely.

[–] Typotyper@sh.itjust.works 14 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The EU pushed for Microsoft to lock the account because they were dealing with Russian oil. It was a Ukrain war sanction

Or at least that’s what the article said.

[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

The article isn't really honest btw, it says indian company and very vaguely alludes to sanctions.

Only a link in the article explains that it's a Russian company dealing with Russian oil

[–] innermachine@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Does anybody read the articles anymore or just post titles?

I just read what AI tells me about it. /s

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 6 points 6 days ago

Idk I wonder how abrupt this actually was. Russia sanctions have been happening for a while.

[–] SheeEttin@lemmy.zip 296 points 1 week ago (21 children)

In this instance, the cutoff was sought by the European Union (EU), in an attempt to pressure Russia to back off its assaults on Ukraine.

Really burying the lead there. They were shut off due to government sanctions, not arbitrarily by Microsoft.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 16 points 6 days ago

Really, really dishonest to demonize Microsoft who are in the middle of this. And I say that as someone who hates Microsoft and most of what they do! But this was intentionally painful sanctions decided on by the governments of 27 member countries. 🤷‍♂️ Don't sell to Russia...

[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 59 points 1 week ago

49% owned by Rosneft while another 49% are owned by "UCP" (Russia's United Capital partners). Basically a 100% russian refinery in India...

[–] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 55 points 1 week ago (2 children)

*burying the lede (it's a term from old press printing)

[–] suigenerix@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Most style guides and standards accept either spelling, especially when writing for general audiences.

For strict, formal writing, "lede" is still preferred.

https://getproofed.com.au/writing-tips/idiom-tips-bury-the-lede-or-bury-the-lead/

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Dreaming_Novaling@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 week ago

I think the main thing to focus on is govs should realize they need to ditch Windows, cause what's stopping dumbass America (Tr*mp) from filling a sanction against a country he doesn't like that week?

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 133 points 1 week ago (3 children)

If software is a service, then service can be denied at any time. Host your own infrastructure, and reclaim digital ownership.

That goes for large businesses and individuals.

[–] atticus88th@lemmy.world 55 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

My company spent last decade automating moving entire organizations and all their software to the cloud. This decade weve been automating moving entire organizations off the cloud. Sometimes to private clouds but most of the time to on prem hardware just like the old n times.

So many were sold a magical fairytale of huge cost savings and reliability but were greated with an entirely different reality.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 20 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I will never understand why businesses want to let someone else control their infrastructure. Putting your money-maker in someone else's hands is just telling them that it's OK to give you the squeeze later.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

We moved out entire stack to the cloud, knowing full well we're gonna bring it back in the future. We hosted our apps on traditional servers and server maintenance was a nightmare, we didn't have the capacity and our application uptime is critical to our operations, so we strategically moved everything to the cloud so we can not worry about the maintenance for a bit while we took the time to rebuild our infrastructure properly with load balancing and high availability, and refactored our applications, we're now slowly moving things back.

[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago

In many cases, I'd say it's because they aren't IT or IT Security focused businesses. A pizza shop, clothing retailer, or whatnot, needs IT stuff to function, but that's not the focus of their business. Hiring an IT team at IT worker rates is expensive, especially as a support/tertiary role for your business.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago

Someone else controls your infra no matter what. Say you've got a data center, you run all your applications on site. Great, until your ISP or electrical or DNS provider or registrar fuck you.

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because managers really like giving contracts to those giving a presentation in an exotic resort and have a great service agreement so all blame for mishaps can be shifted away from their career.

[–] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 week ago

Also, at least in here, lease costs (like all as-a-service things) are considered to be flexible while own hardware and specially workforce are static costs. And no one wants to increase static costs, even if it's clear as daylight that flexible cost only flexes upward over time unless the company suddenly shrinks by quite a lot.

[–] Dadifer@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Whoever decides to trust Microsoft will always get burned. Amazon and Google not much better.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago (6 children)

This case is the result of government sanctions, not Microsoft arbitrarily doing shit.

load more comments (6 replies)

Yep, i've seen this exact pattern at three diffrent companies - the cloud repatriation movement is gaining serious momentum as CFOs finally see the true long-term costs versus the initial promises.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] socialsecurity@piefed.social 5 points 1 week ago

in house IT got fucking lazy or not funded properly likely both

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Curious_Canid@lemmy.ca 44 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The new model is SAAH (Software As A Hostage). You would think that overpaid CTOs and CEOS would be able to anticipate something as obvious as this. "The Cloud" just means "someone else's server".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 week ago

Control is never just outsourced; it's also abdicated through that outsourcing.

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

One extreme defensive move for an enterprise would be to implement full redundancy for anything not hosted on-premises. Redundancy for data protection is relatively straightforward, but having multiple email, supply chain, or e-commerce services is very expensive and disruptive. What are the odds that it would even be needed? Whatever those odds were, they just became much higher.

This is simply dumb. The odds are greater than zero. you must have a disaster plan. It sucks that MS did this but I don’t have much sympathy for anyone that decided to save money by ignoring DR.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You'd think russian assets would work harder not to be dependent on US clouds.

load more comments (1 replies)

Critical Dependency As A Service

For when you need to outsource the potential crippling of your business to potentially hostile third parties.

[–] IWW4@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago

I swear to god I keep wondering when people are going to wake up to the fact that Cloud is such a fucking rip off on every level.

load more comments
view more: next ›