4 ms·
It's a difference in goals. - Hobby kid doesn't want to overpay, shut everything down - Business absolutely doesn't care about spend, if they get some kind of
by ev1 6y ago
It's a difference in goals.
- Hobby kid doesn't want to overpay, shut everything down
- Business absolutely doesn't care about spend, if they get some kind of marketing result traffic spike they just want the site to stay up even if it blows the average budget
Guess which one they optimise for?
- FpUser 6y ago>"Business absolutely doesn't care about spend, if they get some kind of marketing result traffic spike they just want the site to stay up even if it blows the average budget" While this statement can be true in some cases I vividly remember bosses of largish (budget wise company) running around like headless chickens yelling to kill every running instance of service just because they were hit by way more "success" that they've planned for.
- bleepblorp 6y agoVery large businesses might not care about spend, but pretty much everyone else does. Almost everyone will be unhappy if they're stuck with a six figure bill for non-converting visits because their site went viral. Everyone will be unhappy if they're stuck with a six figure bill because their site was used in a DDoS reflection attack, or got pwned and used in a DDoS attack directly. Everything I run on nickle-and-dime-to-death cloud services, such as AWS, won't even respond to unauthenticated requests (Nginx return 444, or reachable only via Wireguard) precisely to mitigate this risk. To do anything else is just financially irresponsible. I've even considered coding a kill switch that will shut down AWS instances if they exceed billing limits, but the fact that AWS charges a fee to check your spend via an API makes this awkward and speaks volumes about Amazon's motivations. Amazon's refusal to offer spending caps on AWS benefits Amazon and only Amazon.
- mwarkentin 6y agoThey have free anomaly detection on spending now (not sure how useful yet).