Recently, an Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud outage caused a veritable digital earthquake. For several hours, numerous companies worldwide—including airlines, banks, e-commerce platforms, and mobile applications—were offline. The problem originated in a data center in Virginia (USA), one of AWS's most critical infrastructures. The incident made it clear that, even in the age of hyperconnectivity, the cloud can also fail.
Amazon Web Services is not just a technology provider: it is the invisible engine that powers much of the modern internet. Thousands of companies, from startups to global giants, rely on its servers to store data, run applications, and manage critical operations. Its promise is attractive: reduced costs, avoiding large infrastructure investments, and paying only for actual resource usage. A near-perfect equation... until something breaks.
In a matter of minutes, the outage knocked out websites, apps, and internal systems. The effects were felt by airlines unable to manage bookings, banks with disrupted operations, and frustrated users unable to access essential services. It was a stark reminder: the cloud is not infallible.
The Cloud: Advantages and Dependencies
Outsourcing IT services to platforms like Amazon, Google, or Microsoft Azure has enormous advantages. It allows companies to make their costs variable, scale rapidly, and benefit from advanced technologies without needing large in-house teams. But this convenience comes at a price: absolute dependence on third parties.
When a company bases its operations on the cloud, its functioning depends on that cloud being always available. If the provider experiences an outage, the business grinds to a halt. What was once a strength—efficiency, flexibility, cost savings—can temporarily become a weakness.
The AWS incident is neither the first nor will it be the last. Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud have also experienced outages in the past. The most important lesson is that no system is infallible. Computing, like any other technology, is subject to physical failures, human error, or cyberattacks.
Therefore, every company must assess what risks it is willing to take. What happens if its servers go down for hours? What contingency plans are in place? How can service continuity be guaranteed? Large organizations typically have redundancy strategies or backups in multiple regions, but many small businesses rely on a single cloud provider and region, leaving them especially vulnerable.
Some might think that the safest option is to return to having servers "in-house." But that doesn't guarantee peace of mind either. Internal systems can also fail, be attacked, or simply become obsolete. The real solution lies in finding a balance: combining cloud services with on-premises infrastructure, implementing off-site backups, and designing disaster recovery plans.
Ultimately, it's about managing risk, not eliminating it. Because, as Murphy's Law states: if something can go wrong, sooner or later it will.
Undoubtedly, Amazon has taken note of the problem. These companies invest billions of dollars in strengthening their security, improving the redundancy of their data centers, and minimizing the impact of future incidents. Every failure is a learning opportunity. But, however sophisticated their systems may be, perfection doesn't exist.
What is clear is that this episode has made many reflect on the degree of technological dependence in which we live. Companies, governments, and even individual users should understand that the cloud is not a magical place, but a complex network of physical servers, maintained by people, and therefore susceptible to error.
I am certain that the cloud will continue to be the cornerstone of the digital world. Its efficiency, flexibility, and power are undeniable. But blindly trusting it without anticipating potential failures can be costly. Every organization must consciously decide what it puts in the cloud and what it keeps under its control.
Amazon's failure has served to remind us of an essential lesson: technology makes our lives easier, but it doesn't make them invulnerable. And in that balance between trust and caution, a good part of the digital future of our societies is at stake.
EN 
ES