[jjoonathan]

?

AWS is run like a gigantic social experiment in "how half-assed and crusty can we make it and still have people pay?"

The reason we put up with them is because A. they're the new IBM, nobody gets fired for choosing AWS, B. you can reliably reach a human who will at least give you a straight answer when you start to suspect that the AI-powered auto-scaling is actually marketing fluff sprayed over a double/halve cron job that runs at the top of the hour.

[oarabbus_]

>B. you can reliably reach a human who will at least give you a straight answer when you start to suspect that the AI-powered auto-scaling is actually marketing fluff sprayed over a double/halve cron job that runs at the top of the hour.

You say this as if it's an afterthought as opposed to an incredibly important and massive advantage AWS has over GCP.

[jjoonathan]

It's one of two reasons I use a service that I otherwise despise. It's not just important, it's an overriding factor.

[m0zg]

^ My impression as well, after spending nearly $200K of my clients' money on AWS. I use GCP for my own work (+ a bunch of on-prem hardware) FWIW, but "the new IBM" phenomenon and "half assedness" is very real and palpable in the case of AWS.

[maest]

Off-topic, but this might be a good opportunity to address this:

Do people find "?" as being aggressive? I think questions generally, tend to be aggressive (which is why deflecting back at your opponent is common in online arguments), and I'm having a hard time seeing how a question mark does more than just attempt to annoy the other person.

I'm curious what others think, I may be too sensitive.

[ddingus]

Hard to know.

I read it as, "huh?" or "what?" or even maybe, "who are you kidding?" and for all of those determining offense level comes with context.

In this context, the person replying clearly sees it as a bullet and puts some detail on why out there.

Frankly, that kind of thing is as offensive as we all might think it is. Almost any offensive thing is.

Context matters.

[jjoonathan]

Yep, that's how I intended it, effectively the same as "What?" with the implied offense level being no larger or smaller than the offense inherent in expressing surprise at someone else's opinion. That level is not zero, but it falls well within the bounds of civil discourse, especially given the lack of elaboration in the original position and the fact that I invested seventeen times its length on explaining my own -- only to not receive a followup from the original poster.

[ddingus]

I myself will use ?!? For curious surprise. Has never offended anyone.

[jjoonathan]

Yeah, next time I'll just type out the question. However, given that it's starting to look like OP ghosted the conversation, I'm increasingly comfortable with the originally-unintended rude undertones of "?"

[ddingus]

I got distracted and had intended a longer post.

If it were me, I would continue your preferred mode of expression.

Offence works in strange ways.

Truth is, we are all as offended as we think we are.

And the reasons for it vary widely, with some well established ones seeing broad, but rarely complete consensus too.

Implication?

There is no way to know what may be offensive beyond a few well trodden examples.

Second order implication?

Offence is gamed easily, and I submit regularly as a tactic more than a meaningful, or sincere sentiment.

Having worked through that in my life, I quit apologizing and put more effort into understanding others and helping others understand me.

Starts with, "I did not intend to offend"

And carries on with whatever the primary context is, not the meta context.

Where others insist on the meta, I simply cannot help them and either the convo settles back to its original intent and value or it does not.

All I can do is leave the door wide open to continue and express my stated intent and that I am the authority on it.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

I cannot tell you how many conversations I have recovered to good ends doing that.

My 0.02

[hnick]

Well it usually has been when I've personally used it.

There is the disdain of not explaining exactly what you are questioning with the implicit assumption you are questioning everything said. It's pretty much a stand-in for "WTF are you on about? I don't even know how to ask a sensible question about what you said." when I've used it.

In this case though? It's a single statement so maybe a bit abrupt but I read it as a request for clarification. A fairly strong statement was made (essentially "don't use this company") with no backup or explanation. So an equal lack of effort was made proportionally in response.

[ciarannolan]

> Do people find "?" as being aggressive?

I'm on the younger side for HN. In my social circles replying to something with either just '?' or just a leading '?' is pretty aggressive and rude.

[pc86]

This is great for AWS compared to GCP, but what about Azure? If anyone was "the new IBM" I would have expected it to be Microsoft (but I agree, it's not).