All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
AWS: Inaccurate Estimated Billing Data – $1.7 billion
whynotlearn
Member
Someone on reddit and hackernews shared this.
what they said on hackernews:
URL already posted: https://health.aws.amazon.com/health/status
I've got an estimated bill for $1.7 BILLION over this month. Normal usage is < $5.
Obvs have created an urgent AWS support ticket. Anyone else seeing something like this?
Update: Reddit link: https://www.reddit.com/r/aws/comments/1uyuaw7/help_my_bill_s...
what they said on reddit:
HELP! My bill skyrocketed from around 5 cents per month to 2.5 billion USD!!!!
As per title, today I received a bunch of billing alerts in my email because I went over my max threshold of 100 usd.
AWS says I owe them about 2.5 billion dollars so far and it's only the 17th of the month. I have only one s3 bucket that hasn't been touched since 2023 and is not public, and I am not even using ecr at all, I have no registry on any region that I am aware of. I tried opening a support ticket but nothing so far.
What should I do? Is there any way to escalate this urgently?
What do you guys think of the whole situation? Its a good starting plot to a horror story in my opinion.
Comments
one does not simply use aws
or azure or gcp
GCP has problems where a billion dollar company (Railway) got their accounts banned somehow and they have just as many horror stories.
And Azure is well.... Azure. The only way that it makes sense perhaps is by the microsoft package in corporate perhaps but I have heard some really insane stories regarding Azure as well.
let after the 328th company involucrated overnight: ALL IS FINE AND REMEMBER THAT LARGE COMPANIES ARE NOT BETTER, A COMPANY BEING LARGE MEANS NOTHING
let when aws has one bug: I WOULD NEVER EVER USE AWS THIS IS ABSURD AND CAN NOT BE TOLERATED
To be honest, you are paying a premium for AWS to not have bugs.
Breaking news: a trillion dollar company has more scrutiny than a LET host.
please show me a single quote of any large AWS client who has ever said that they're using AWS due to there being 0 bugs ever
Signing highly asymmetric deals is a gamble, the stakes are inherently very unbalanced, the house always wins.
That guy gambled and lost, should have known better.
I am not saying 0 bugs like in insensitive bugs but rather critical bugs.
yes people are using AWS because they don't want critical bugs in billing or uptime or whatever because they think that AWS has figured it out after years of their existence.
There is a difference between a small bug and a rather large bug that is in billing.
If AWS is able to charge an eggregious premium over other providers. There are things that AWS has which others dont. People know AWS and trust it more than everything else. Businesses know about AWS and trust it more, and the reason that they trust AWS is because large companies use it so surely it must be good, reliable in everything whether in terms of uptime, account issues/customer support, billing etc. so when billing has a issue so big, yes it puts some questions in place.
No bugs huh?
How about a..
1.7 BILLION DOLLA BUG
Is that enough of a bug for ya?
Or is that a FEATURE, not a bug?
LOL LMAO
must be using bucket on cursed zones
Did they attempt to charge this sum from a credit card? Would be a funny notification from the bank
good luck paying that back
nice chicken you should have had for that money!
Aws has a history of billing issues and if people didn't go public and got the virality with it, I doubt they would have been resolved.
I cannot fathom why you ever would pick them with the many options you have
Their dashboard is made to make mistakes, similar like those daytrading dashboards.
Ooopsie
The selection of security first LET providers with petabytes of storage in multiple zones is non existent.
But I agree "one" person won't get the same benefit as "one" Fortune 500.
Also, was on a Support call the other week to solve an issue our IT and consultant couldn't figure out in multiple hour long sessions. Our AWS support missus understood the problem, and diagnosed the issue in like 10 minutes (it was our ITs fault, but I kind of knew that given her stance from the start it wasn't her fault)
I don't use AWS because when I pay [insert shithost here] $50 up front they get $50, if I start using AWS they might one day decide to take $5000.
Fascinating!
ok name many better options with support for complience mode on s3 with physical data being stored in sweden
rhetorical question, you can't, and if you can, they'll be other similar providers just like AWS, I'm thinking Azure probably supports this and they have a datacenter in sweden, but you won't see host-c or skhron support this, it's completely different markets for completely different audiences
regulatory reasons make it completely uninteresting to even compare
The engineers and devs that often use a lot of AWS infrastructure are probably paid $250k-$500k/year. The monthly aws bill is not as large (in comparison) you'd think.
have you checked out https://hexabyte.se ?, they provide S3 storage at comparatively cheap prices. They seem relatively stable to me for production use, so what do you think of them?
(And as always one should have a backup as well)
but y'know I do think that we might be straying away from the point of the post and I do understand what you mean from regulatory point of view as well but hopefully this helps ya.
I haven’t, but honestly I’d really doubt if they supported complience mode, I can check. Played around a bit in their UI and it looked very basic. Not even the bigger names like GleSYS etc do
You can perhaps ask them for compliance mode. I do think that they might support it given that iirc they had some sweden businesses on so they must follow the regulations you are talking about I suppose
Ironic because the post we are talking within is about how AWS's UI messed up and is showing billions of dollars* I'd much rather take a basic UI that is true than the billing issues that AWS seems to be providing of.
but honestly if it fits your compliance needs, then I think that its all good, you should contact them asking about these regulations/compliance perhaps
Also I’m fairly convinced it’s a 1-man operation, kinda risky for complience mode (if he decides to do something else)
So the issue here is the UI flop and show inccorect numba, or the one in reddit thread is being charge $2.5 B ?
I wonder, if a government department gets this kind of bill, will they just blindly pay it, "Oh hey, we have a discount this month! We were expecting $5b this month!"
i saw the 700k bill, my balls shrank and i was sweating cold sweat like crazy, thought my life is over. Maybe i got hacked then saw the issue tracker, phew..