[hmartin]

They should... put work into sacrificing revenue?

[bensyverson]

If you have a local “digital twin” of the service, it makes it much easier to develop against using AI. This would likely drive adoption.

[Onavo]

It's even easier for their revenue if you have to provision dev AWS environments for everyone.

[fabianlindfors]

Totally agree that AI coding makes this even more important. We are working on a coding agent-first cloud and a large part of that is ensuring everything runs locally so folks can let their coding agents define the infra and test it all

[borplk]

It's not clear that it would be a net-negative on the revenue.

It could encourage more development and adoption and lead to being a net-positive for the revenue.

[hmartin]

It's a fair point but iff you neglect that the overwhelming revenue drivers for these services are large corps who are already locked-in. Devx doesn't matter at all once you're there.

The myopathy among us "online people" is assuming number of voices here and elsewhere correlate to revenue.

It does not.

[shrikant]

Just fyi, myopathy is a general term for diseases that affect some types of muscles, while myopia is short-sightedness -- assuming the latter is what you were going for!

[hmartin]

Thanks!

[boomlinde]

If it's irrelevant whether or not individual developers are on board, why are Amazon offering a free plan?

[boomlinde]

Without the infrastructure behind it to make it make sense, cloud platforms just seem like convoluted ways of storing data and launching applications/VMs to me.

The only functional use of a tool like this to me would be to learn how to use AWS so that I can work for people who want me to use AWS. Would that not be to Amazon's benefit?

[operator_nil]

Why would an emulator sacrifice revenue? It's like saying minecraft destroys construction businesses