Only took 18 years since it was first reported.
this post was submitted on 14 May 2024
118 points (96.8% liked)
Programming
17354 readers
338 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
In other words, a big customer finally got effected
Haven't read into this too much, but I think the affected person that made this get attention was a solo dev that was prototyping a solution for one of his customers.
And the reason he raised a stink was because he had a huge bill, as the name he chose for his bucket was by chance the same an open source project used as a sample bucket name, so whenever someone deployed it without first customising the config, it was pinging his bucket and getting a 403.
Given the timing i suspect this was the article that drove the change. It was shared quite a bit over past few weeks.
This is why most of our thornier bugs eventually get fixed.
How the fuck did people tolerate this service when getting charged for fucking 403 errors?
I believe that the trick is not to show the developers the bill.
Let the developers all tell each other "it's cheap because you don't have to buy the servers; you only pay for what you use!"
Only managers see the real price.
I believe that the trick is not to show the developers the bill.
I haven't had access to the AWS bill in 4 of 5 companies that I've worked at. Why? Fuck if I knew, but I got vague answers like security and compliance when I asked.
I wonder how many thousands could have been saved if all devs could see what they're actually paying for but not using.
I think it's a combination of things. My experience definitely parallels yours: when developers have access to the bill they tend to realize the cost of the services they are using. Sometimes even resulting in optimizations to those costs.
At the same time AWS can get fucked with how horrible their bills are to understand. They don't exactly go out of their way or even slightly on a good path to deliver a clear bill.
So even if the developers have access to the bills they might just end up with an impenetrable list of bullshit from AWS
They will don't care, not their money, not their job. Can't blame them
They show us the cloud bills at my work. It's a sobering moment when you see the monthly price tag for your team's development work.
I'm not saying it's not justified or that the company doesn't make up for that cost many times over but it's very useful to have a real world reference.
because it didn't happen to be a problem at the time
It makes me wonder how much income this actually provided to AWS.
Probably not much, but how many people noticed a few bucks here and there on a massive bill?