[baz00]

I am completely dumbfounded by this reply.

You're suggesting we engineer something on S3 and aws-cli, while complaining about engineering something ourselves when AWS offers a perfectly good queue service that requires no engineering?

Uff. I'm going to buy a hut in the woods and live in it.

[slt2021]

I used s3 just as an example of a service with very good track record of availability for a very low cost - and perfectly reliable available service can be created with bash scripts, aws-cli and free-tier AWS account.

perfectly fine with using SQS, just it will have worse availability guarantees than S3 - people should understand tradeoffs

[Brian_K_White]

I don't know but I think they might be suggesting that the answer to "don't need a huge complex system" is not "use someone else's huge complex system".

[slt2021]

my understanding is that you should not roll your own expensive complex huge system, just use AWS S3 which provides eleven nines of availability at $22/tb/mo.

It is really hard to beat the cost/benefit ratio of S3.

a lot of mediocre engineers cannot swallow a pill that all their expensive work with hundreds of hours of overengineering could be replaced by a couple of AWS managed serverless services stitched together with a few mouse clicks or a single .yml file

[SanderNL]

Why does AWS even enter the conversation?

[catchnear4321]

same reason any vendor enters the conversation. the argument that you can get more value out of the vendor than you would have out of a full time employee, and often for less money.

sometimes it really does make sense just to pay someone else to solve the problem. not always, but not never.