Are the contracts so easy to bypass? Who signs a contract with an SLA knowing the service provider will just lie about the availability? Is the client supposed to sue the provider any time there is an SLA breach?

▲

netdevphoenix an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Anyone who doesn't have any choice financially or gnostically. Same reason why people pay Netflix despite the low quality of most of their shows and the constant termination of tv series after 1 season. Same reason why people put up with Meta not caring about moderating or harmful content. The power dynamics resemble a monopoly

	▲	ozim an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Most of services are not really critical but customers want to have 99.999% on the paper. Most of the time people will just get by and ignore even full day of downtime as minor inconvenience. Loss of revenue for the day - well you most likely will have to eat that, because going to court and having lawyers fighting over it most likely will cost you as much as just forgetting about it. If your company goes bankrupt because AWS/Cloudflare/GCP/Azure is down for a day or two - guess what - you won't have money to sue them ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and most likely will have bunch of more pressing problems on your hand.

▲

heipei an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The client is supposed to monitor availability themselves, that is how these contracts work.

▲

immibis an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The company that is trying to cancel its contract early needs to prove the SLA was violated, which is very easy of the company providing the service also provides a page that says their SLA was violated. Otherwise it's much harder to prove.