It does launch an instance and take a snapshot but what's happening is the sysprep and OOBE stuff that can take 10 mins or so (you can find it in the console and startup logs). That's a lot more overheard than just hydrating an EBS volume.
I'd simplify the guidance even more: short hashes are fine if and only if the repository hasn't been modified since they were generated (AFAIK, git automatically increases the length of the short hash it displays whenever it would otherwise cause a collision).
R2 also doesn't have all the features that S3 does - including an equivalent of S3 Glacier, which is cheaper storage than R2. R2 also doesn't have object tagging, object-level permissions, or object locking. Sure, you could build your own layer in front of R2 that gives you these features, but are you necessarily saving money over just using S3?
Anyone know why the rule against perpetuities wouldn’t apply? Also, is there anyone who could meaningfully enforce this covenant? I appreciate that you wouldn’t necessarily want to risk it anyway, but just to ensure I understand the issue here.
The rule against perpetuities places some limitations on the creation of future interests in land. The kind of covenant in this case doesn't create a future interest.
Presumably someone has a claim for damages if the covenant is violated, in which case they have a future interest in it. If no-one can enforce the covenant, well, it might as well not exist.
The point is that once they are no longer compatible, people would standardize on the one that they're familiar with which is most likely the one that's running on their machine.
But currently, people are equally comfortable with both; the CLI commands are exactly identical between the two, save for the name of the binary itself. In any org where both are in use, if people are forced to choose at some point, they will have to balance many other factors besides familiarity, such as features and confidence in the platform.
The high-voltage transmission grid is operated by National Grid, which is a British company. Distribution to end-users is operated at a regional level by one of six* Distribution Network Operators [1], three of which are British-owned.
Consumers can purchase electricity from any electricity supplier that is willing to sell to them. Naturally, since it all goes into one grid, suppliers are responsible for ensuring that they purchase from generators and sell to consumers an equal amount of electricity. EDF is one of several suppliers in the market. (There were many more until energy prices rose following the Russian invasion of Ukraine and many suppliers collapsed.)
The gas distribution system works similarly, but I'm not familiar with the details.
* It's slightly more complicated, but it rounds to six.
https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/next-steps-for-the-we...
https://registrars.nominet.uk/gtlds/ebero/