Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
441–450 of 684 posts
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
No but they have the power to remove themselves from the situation and should have a prudence to do so. We have places for women and children to go to escape abuse, so find your hideout and escape the abusive relationship.
[flagged]
I actually have extensive experience on this subject for the last 20 years. Thanks though. https://www.helpguide.org/relationships/domestic-abuse/getti...
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
They absolutely could calculate and put the price in the UI if they wished to. Other cloud vendors do.
For which services? Let’s look at Lambda for a second. Deploying a lambda function to AWS costs literally nothing. And yet, depending on how it’s used, it can cost an infinite amount of money. Which price should it show? There are far more sevices like Lambda than EC2.
> Which price should it show?
"Estimated cost per 1000 invocations"
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#444These arguments against AWS are boring. 99% of the negative comments are along the line of "so i have a dead simple product, I dont know anything about AWS, I logged in and it was super complicated and it seemed pricey". Well guess what, if you have a CRUD website and 100 users you're just not the target. Move on. Some days ago I wanted to sketch a 3D model of my TV remote. I opened blender and what a mess of complic…
I see a lot of learned helplessness around this stuff. People managed fleets of servers before the cloud you know, it's not impossible.
Cloud has pros and cons, both for small and large setups. I've spent ca 10 years working with GCP, and as the article says, there's a lot of complexity in these systems as well. And the network cost.. yikes
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#445I always smile at posts like this. They're right and wrong at the same time. Systems should be "as simple as possible, but no simpler". And thinking that you can gloss over the detail is just going to create more hassle later on. IAM is just complex. I can't think of any implementation of "users, groups, roles, policies, identity providers, oidc" that is truly simple. I'm reminded of a guy I worked with, who fought a…
IAM is unnecessarily bad. I recently had to set a trivial policy, and was doing it correctly. The console kept warning me that I was giving root AWS access to my external application because they want people to use the locked in AWS path, and I was running off cloud. On top of that, they break copy paste on the web console, so you can’t just ctrl-c ctrl-v and then ask Claude to explain their WTF-ery. Instead, you hav…
You think that you're complaining about IAM, but really you're complaining about the web ui. I rarely use the web console, I use terraform or the cli. I'd you're vibe coding your infra with Claude, point it at the cli / terraform. Skip the ui.
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
These were open source projects that had to change licenses away from open source because of AWS. I'm not sure how the OSS companies are the bad guy here.
There is no bad guy. The OSS license meant that AWS was perfectly free to do as they did. If the companies who licensed their software as OSS didn't want that, then they shouldn't have used an OSS license.
Ok, then fine, the companies who licensed their software as OSS did that for as long as they wanted to, and then they moved away. What's the issue here?
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#447Earlier quoted context omitted.
No but they have the power to remove themselves from the situation and should have a prudence to do so. We have places for women and children to go to escape abuse, so find your hideout and escape the abusive relationship.
Here’s a cool fact: in America only 35% of DV survivors retain full custody of their children and only 45% retain primary custody. If you flee domestic violence you are more likely than not to lose custody of your children to your abuser.
> Here’s a cool fact: in America only 35% of DV survivors retain full custody of their children and only 45% retain primary custody.
That's because joint custody is the default and you need to have really good evidence when you want to restrict a kids access to their father.
> If you flee domestic violence you are more likely than not to lose custody of your children to your abuser.
"Being forced to allow kids to see their father" is, to you, the same as "losing custody of your children"?
You're talking absolute horse puckey here. I'm also pretty certain you don't believe it.
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not sure I understand. AWS has detailed pricing information for each service. I’ve never felt surprised by pricing. Cost has been surprising, but that happens when usage is surprising in my experience.
In completely unrelated pages to where you setup resources, yes. Ec2 pricing is in a random doc disconnected from the AWS console. They absolutely could to you a base price on the ec2 setup page, but they don't. And I have been absolutely surprised by pricing. Services that do almost nothing could cost more than your ec2.
Replying to myself, this is not true anymore, for ec2 at least. I think that my comment was upvoted so much really speaks to how chaotic and inconsistent the UI is, because you get a totally different experience using other services.
For instance, I don't see any pricing information when setting up an FSx filesystem, even for the size you setup. And there's definitely nothing saying backups will cost you more than storage (even though they are incremental?)
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#449Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it's pretty bad. They show you the cost after all the resources are set up. Even setting up an ec2 instance, a really basic use case that has a fixed cost based on size, you have to go Google it and find their ec2 pricing table. It would take no space to just put the price per hour in the drop-down as you're picking an instance. But no, they obscure it on purpose. That's just for ec2. Everything is like this. Supe…
> Even setting up an ec2 instance, a really basic use case that has a fixed cost based on size, you have to go Google it and find their ec2 pricing table This is the "Comparison Table" from the EC2 launch wizard: https://imgur.com/a/YjFhkzb The pricing is right there, along with filtering and sorting.
For the record, my original complaint that ec2 did not have pricing in the dropdown seems to be untrue right now, which is great! For the sake of UX discussion, I want to talk about your picture as if that were the only way to get this info. So let me explain why that's bad.
The main reason is this is only true for ec2 and every other resource has its own slightly different way of getting the cost, making it really easy to miss things like this. But here are the steps we take to get to your image.
- First you click compare instance types, and you're brought to a completely different page with a table.
- By default, there is no column for pricing, but two columns for "storage space" even though most of the instance types have these blank.
- There's nothing that says you can add columns to this page. You eventually figure out it's the gear icon.
- Then you click the gear on the top right to look at column names. You try searching the 44 column names for "price" or "cost" but both of those turn up blank, because there's no fuzzy searching.
- So rather than use the search box, you manually scroll through all 44 column names and find pricing at the bottom of the list.
This is the definition of out of the way. It's hard to imagine why you would default to showing two different storage columns over the pricing column, when half the instances are blank on storage.
Now do FSx, which has no pricing information at all, or any links to pricing information. They have an info tab telling you your backups are incremental, which would make you think they are fairly inexpensive. Not more expensive than the filesystem itself!
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#450Earlier quoted context omitted.
A core part of an engineers job is including thinking about cost in what they do.
Right - nobody who’s had a formal education in engineering would think that way, because cost considerations are part of the curriculum from the start.
I can't recall cost ever coming up as a consideration during my years of formal computer science studies in school. Big-O efficiency, sure, but the cost of compute, storage, bandwidth, nope, not once.
It was absolutely hammered into me in the years of working for startups that followed, though.