Thread

1. dpedu · 1791074457 · focus · HN ↗

   I'm surprised this isn't law. Should it be?

   1. dboreham · 1791075409 · focus · HN ↗

      So if you use more electricity next month the CEO of the electric company should be put in jail?

      1. genxy · 1791076684 · focus · HN ↗

         Analogies are not the core of your cognition.
      2. dpedu · 1791076929 · focus · HN ↗

         I understand this is snark, but if you think about it, this is already implemented in electrical infrastructure. If I use too much power, the circuit breaker trips to protect me and protect the electrical grid. OP is about a billing breaker, but the parallels should be obvious.

         If the CEO of the electric company didn't mandate circuit breakers, he should go to jail.

         1. lorecoeur · 1791078719 · focus · HN ↗

            The breaker in this analogy is equivalent to rate quota limits, it limits peak throughput.

            You can rack up an outrageous monthly electricity bill without tripping a breaker.

            1. josephcsible · 1791080323 · focus · HN ↗

               The peak throughput does result in an overall monthly limit though. For a house with a 200A main breaker, that effectively limits your electric bill to $7,000/month, which is very reasonable compared to the tens of thousands of dollars in a single day that a lot of cloud billing disasters end up costing.
      3. popalchemist · 1791077299 · focus · HN ↗

         Utilities required for basic survival are expected to remain on for obvious reasons. Like not letting people die.

         1. [deleted] · 1791077683 · focus · HN ↗

            [deleted]

         2. [deleted] · 1791078987 · focus · HN ↗

            [deleted]

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.