The “fail fast” approach is just what it sounds like – it encourages us to anticipate potential problems and design our system accordingly so that it fails quickly in the event of an error or unexpected circumstances. This means that any issues are caught before they become more serious and costly to fix. The main benefit of this strategy is that it reduces our risk by ensuring that any errors are identified as soon as they occur, reducing our exposure time with potentially disastrous consequences. The downside is that this approach can be quite costly if not implemented properly, as all potential points of failure must be anticipated beforehand. On the other hand, the “robust” approach focuses on making sure that our system will continue functioning even when faced with unexpected conditions or events. This means that instead of anticipating every potential issue, we build systems and components to withstand any kind of problem or issue without completely failing. This strategy has its own set of benefits, such as being able to better handle unexpected scenarios without having to anticipate them ahead of time (which is impossible in many cases). However, this method can also be very costly if not implemented carefully; while robustness can prevent catastrophic failures, it can also lead to sluggish performance or increased complexity which may drive users away from your product or service.